RetroSearch Browse

Thu Jun 22 18:12:01 CEST 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-June/066373.html

Brett Cannon wrote:
> On 6/22/06, *Gerhard Häring* <gh at ghaering.de <mailto:gh at ghaering.de>> wrote:
> 
>     Brett Cannon wrote:
>      > I have been working on a design doc for restricted execution of
>     Python
>      > [...]
> 
>     All the rest of the API made sense to me, but I couldn't understand why
> 
>     PyXXX_MemoryFree
> 
>     is needed. How could memory usage possibly fall below 0?
> 
> It can't in real life, but people could call MemoryFree() too many 
> times.  Plus you need some way to lower the amount when memory is 
> freed.  No need to penalize a script that does a bunch of malloc/free 
> calls compared to one that just does a bunch of malloc calls.

But if you want to limit the amount of memory a Python interpreter can 
use, wouldn't you have to integrate that resource checking into the 
standard Alloc/Dealloc functions instead of only enforcing the resource 
limit when some new API functions are called?

Existing extension modules and existing C code in the Python interpreter 
have no idea of any PyXXX_ calls, so I don't understand how new API 
functions help here.

-- Gerhard

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-June/066373.html below:

[Python-Dev] doc for new restricted execution design for Python