On 3/28/06, Chris AtLee <chris at atlee.ca> wrote: > > On 3/28/06, Neal Norwitz <nnorwitz at gmail.com> wrote: > > We've made a lot of improvement with testing over the years. > > Recently, we've gotten even more serious with the buildbot, Coverity, > > and coverage (http://coverage.livinglogic.de). However, in order to > > improve quality even further, we need to do a little more work. This > > is especially important with the upcoming 2.5. Python 2.5 is the most > > fundamental set of changes to Python since 2.2. If we're to make this > > release work, we need to be very careful about it. > > This reminds me of something I've been wanting to ask for a while: > does anybody run python through valgrind on a regular basis? I've > noticed that valgrind complains a lot about invalid reads in > PyObject_Free. I know that valgrind can warn about things that turn > out not to be problems, but would generating a suppresion file and > running all or part of the test suite through valgrind on the > buildbots be useful? See Misc/README.valgrind and Misc/valgrind-python.supp. I ran Python with valgrind two weeks ago, and didn't encounter any new problems. -- Thomas Wouters <thomas at python.org> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread! -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20060328/a604abe6/attachment.html
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