In http://docs.python.org/dev/c-api/memory.html#examples:

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
char *buf1 = PyMem_New(char, BUFSIZ);
char *buf2 = (char *) malloc(BUFSIZ);
char *buf3 = (char *) PyMem_Malloc(BUFSIZ);
...
PyMem_Del(buf3);  /* Wrong -- should be PyMem_Free() */
free(buf2);       /* Right -- allocated via malloc() */
free(buf1);       /* Fatal -- should be PyMem_Del()  */
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Is there a good reason to have the second set of 3 lines in the opposite order as the first three?  At first I missed that they were in a different order and thought there was an error in the example.  If there's no good reason for the order, it would be worth fixing.  If there is a good reason,  a comment in the example would help.  Either way I'd be glad to patch it (will go ahead with fixing the ordering later today if no one does it first).

Please don't change this: It's a common pattern in C to undo memory
allocations in the opposite order.

Thanks for clarifying, Stefan.  Are you opposed to a comment in the example?

Moderately opposed, yes. PyMem_Malloc()/PyMem_Free() and PyMem_New()/PyMem_Del()
are already explained in depth above.

Sorry, I'd meant something like this:

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
char *buf1 = PyMem_New(char, BUFSIZ);
char *buf2 = (char *) malloc(BUFSIZ);
char *buf3 = (char *) PyMem_Malloc(BUFSIZ);
...
/* in reverse order */
PyMem_Del(buf3);  /* Wrong -- should be PyMem_Free() */
free(buf2);       /* Right -- allocated via malloc() */
free(buf1);       /* Fatal -- should be PyMem_Del()  */
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

This will help if someone does not know the common pattern.