homepage

> Why do you say that:
> 
> > There is no feasible way the bf_releasebuffer can keep track of how 
> > many calls to it have been made.
I was probably thinking about allocating new temporary arrays for
strides etc. on each *_getbuffer -- if that's done, then manually
keeping track of all the allocated memory seems like a waste of effort
(ie. not feasible).
But yes, if memory allocated for entries in Py_buffer is shared between
all exported buffer views, that sounds better -- for some reason I
didn't think about that... So we'll do it like this in Numpy then.
But still, I take it that the way it currently works is not the intended
behavior? The segmentation faults caused by this came as a bit of a
surprise to me, as the assumption about paired *_getbuffer and
*_releasebuffer calls is very natural.