Message235151
| Author |
rhansen |
| Recipients |
pitrou, rhansen, seberg, skrah |
| Date |
2015年02月01日.09:21:18 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1422782478.58.0.298625475587.issue23352@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
>> When I compile and run the above (latest Cython from Git master), I
>> get:
>>
>> ()
>> ()
>
> With Cython version 0.20.1post0 I get:
>
> >>> foo.foo()
> (-1,)
> (-1,)
>
> If you get the correct output from the latest Cython, it looks like
> this issue has been fixed.
Oops, I was running a locally modified version of Cython that contained a patch meant to work around issue #23349.
When I run the *actual* upstream master I get the same behavior that you do.
But either way, I don't see why it's a problem that it prints (-1,) for the PyBUF_ND case. The consumer didn't request suboffsets information so I would expect it to be OK for the producer to put whatever it wants in the suboffsets field, including a junk pointer that would segfault upon dereference. |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2015年02月01日 09:21:18 | rhansen | set | recipients:
+ rhansen, pitrou, skrah, seberg |
| 2015年02月01日 09:21:18 | rhansen | set | messageid: <1422782478.58.0.298625475587.issue23352@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| 2015年02月01日 09:21:18 | rhansen | link | issue23352 messages |
| 2015年02月01日 09:21:18 | rhansen | create |
|