| To: | Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Python code vs local: host connections |
| From: | fche@xxxxxxxxxx (Frank Ch. Eigler) |
| Date: | Tue, 17 Sep 2013 09:53:08 -0400 |
| Cc: | Dave Brolley <brolley@xxxxxxxxxx>, Stan Cox <scox@xxxxxxxxxx>, pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| Delivered-to: | pcp@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <503959600.22684715.1379397714223.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> (Nathan Scott's message of "Tue, 17 Sep 2013 02:01:54 -0400 (EDT)") |
| References: | <100234653.22684536.1379397669579.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> <503959600.22684715.1379397714223.JavaMail.root@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) |
Nathan Scott <nathans@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > [...] It looks good to me, except: > - def pmGetContextHostName( self ): > + def pmGetContextHostName(self): > [...] > - status = LIBPCP.pmGetContextHostName(self.ctx) > - if status < 0: > - raise pmErr, status > + hp = c_char_p() > + hp = LIBPCP.pmGetContextHostName(self.ctx) > + hostname = hp > + LIBC.free(hp) > return status While the new implementation of pmGetContextHostName does a strdup, it's not documented to do that. (For that matter, strdup could return NULL, which we don't handle at all.) I'm not sure we'd like to instill that change in clients, by having them start to LIBC.free() the result. Or do we? Maybe old clients would leak, but new ones (running against the new libpcp.so only?) could free() the leak. - FChE |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | pcp updates: pmdaproc, Nathan Scott |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Python code vs local: host connections, Frank Ch. Eigler |
| Previous by Thread: | Python code vs local: host connections, Nathan Scott |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Python code vs local: host connections, Frank Ch. Eigler |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |