Michael Hudson wrote:
> [...]
>>
>>>test_codeccallbacks leaked 1107 references
> [...]
>>but there seem to be real leaks here.
>
> In a perverse kind of way, phew :-) Wouldn't want to have gone to all
> this effort to uncover *nothing* but a bunch of false alarms...
I've fixed two of the leaks.
> [...]
>
> In general (not sure about these tests) you want to run each test a
> few time to let things settle down before measuring the effect on
> gettotalrefcount().
I think I'll try that, but this will take ages to run. Meanwhile
here is the result of my patch for the complete test suite:
http://styx.livinglogic.de/~walter/reflog3.txt
(This includes only unittest based tests)
It would simplify hunting leaks if we separated tests that are
known to change the total refcount from the rest by moving
them to separate test methods or even test cases.
Bye,
Walter Dörwald
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4