This issue tracker has been migrated to GitHub, and is currently read-only.
For more information, see the GitHub FAQs in the Python's Developer Guide.

Author martin.panter
Recipients JakeMont, jnoller, martin.panter, r.david.murray, sbt, serhiy.storchaka, skrah, zach.ware
Date 2015-10-31.05:48:16
SpamBayes Score -1.0
Marked as misclassified Yes
Message-id <>
Okay, so <> says writability must be consistent. As far as I can see, there is no similar requirement for contiguity. So in theory PyBUF_FULL_RO could produce a discontiguous buffer when PyBUF_WRITABLE would have produced a contiguous one. But I guess this is rather unlikely, so Eryksun’s approach might be good enough.

I am starting to wonder why the current memory view hack should even be necessary. It seems like a memory view created by PyMemoryView_FromBuffer() will eventually do the equivalent of PyBuffer_Release(), except that it leaks a reference to the underlying Python object. This was also brought up at <>, but the question is not resolved that I can see.

Possibly also related is Issue 15821, but I don’t know enough details or history to be sure.
Date User Action Args
2015-10-31 05:48:17martin.pantersetrecipients: + martin.panter, jnoller, r.david.murray, skrah, sbt, zach.ware, serhiy.storchaka, JakeMont
2015-10-31 05:48:17martin.pantersetmessageid: <>
2015-10-31 05:48:17martin.panterlinkissue25498 messages
2015-10-31 05:48:16martin.pantercreate