Author ghazel
Recipients akuchling, ghazel, loewis, r.david.murray, terry.reedy, tim.peters, vstinner
Date 2010-06-26.05:14:31
SpamBayes Score 0.135487
Marked as misclassified No
Message-id <1277529274.67.0.908307357254.issue1565525@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
In-reply-to
Content
It depends on how you look at it. Those two issues describe the surprising behavior of the same references I'm talking about here, when the lifetime of the traceback reference is only inside the same frame. This ticket describes the surprising behavior of those references when the lifetime of the traceback is any number of frames. My example eat_memory.py is much closer to the issue described in those links - the lifetime of the traceback object is insignificantly one frame higher, not the lifetime of the application.

Either way, a feature to discard those references would resolve both.
History
Date User Action Args
2010-06-26 05:14:35ghazelsetrecipients: + ghazel, tim.peters, loewis, akuchling, terry.reedy, vstinner, r.david.murray
2010-06-26 05:14:34ghazelsetmessageid: <1277529274.67.0.908307357254.issue1565525@psf.upfronthosting.co.za>
2010-06-26 05:14:32ghazellinkissue1565525 messages
2010-06-26 05:14:31ghazelcreate