Message48095
| Author |
arigo |
| Recipients |
| Date |
2005年04月03日.14:11:21 |
| SpamBayes Score |
| Marked as misclassified |
| Message-id |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
Logged In: YES
user_id=4771
I'm confused: the rule for negative slot offsets appear to be different to the one for tp_dictoffset, which only increases the amount of obscurity around here.
tp_dictoffset counts relative to the end of the object, whereas in your patch negative slot offsets are a different trick to mean "relative to the start but skipping the varsized part". The difference shows up when subclassing increases tp_basicsize. This should be resolved one way or the other -- and I think that a clear picture of the various parts of the object and how they are measured would be a good start.
That's also related to your proposed change to extra_ivars(), which would become slightly more permissive; I strongly suspect that it would allow more strange segfaulting cases to sneak in undetected... |
|
History
|
|---|
| Date |
User |
Action |
Args |
| 2007年08月23日 15:42:30 | admin | link | issue1173475 messages |
| 2007年08月23日 15:42:30 | admin | create |
|