fix reference counting issues in asciidtype and metadatadtype
#20
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Going to self-merge, but if you're reading this and spot any issues please let me know and I'll come back to this. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
common_instancemust return a new reference, but in these two dtypes I was returning a borrowed reference instead. This ended up not being a problem formetadatadtypebecause of a missingPy_DECREFinget_metadata, but was a problem forASCIIDTypebecause there isn't any indirection to get the dtype's "value" so there wasn't an opportunity to make an identical bug.This PR fixes reference counting issues in both dtypes, adds a new test for
ASCIIDTypeto check that creating an array from scalars works correctly, and fills outcommon_instanceforasciidtypebased on thesizeattribute.