Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-March/021460.html below:

[Python-Dev] pymalloc API - is 1.5.2 compatibility a possible explanation?

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] pymalloc API - is 1.5.2 compatibility a possible explanation?
• Next message: [Python-Dev] pymalloc API - is 1.5.2 compatibility a possible explanation?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

tim wrote:

> [Fredrik Lundh]
> > ...
> > I've fixed the "incorrect usage" for PIL 1.1.4.  just some
> > 100 more modules to fix...
> 
> I'd hold off on this, under the theory that we can't actually get away with
> breaking 100s of modules.  Is all your "breakage" of the form PyObject_NEW +
> PyMem_DEL?

that's the only thing I've been looking for.

from a quick sampling, it doesn't look like we have any real
bugs (e.g. NEW/free mixups) in the code base, but I haven't
looked everywhere.

</F>

• Previous message: [Python-Dev] pymalloc API - is 1.5.2 compatibility a possible explanation?
• Next message: [Python-Dev] pymalloc API - is 1.5.2 compatibility a possible explanation?
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

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