RE: [Plplot-devel] Solved the xw09.py segfault

[Geoffrey F. <fu...@ga...>]

Hi Alan,

Thanks for your work, and progress.  I will confess to some
substantial skepticism that adding a static qualifier to a function is
really fixing anything.  I'm more inclined to think it is masking a
problem that still remains.  Sorry I've never gotten around to looking
into the matter.  Maybe I'll get to that one of these days, or, maybe
I never will :-).

It's fine to combine plmodule2.c into plmodule.c if you prefer it that
way.  I had them apart just to control compile time during a period
when I was mostly working on plmodule2.c, but not touching all the
other stuff in plmodule.c.  But that was years ago, and if I remember,
I was developing on a Linux box running a 486 DX/2 66 MHz at the
time, so compile times were much worse than what we experience with
modern hardware.

Alan W. Irwin writes:
 > The long-standing segfault problem with xw09 using python 2 disappears if I
 > define pl_cont (and pl_shade) as static to make them consistent with what is
 > done for the embedded examples in the python documentation.  In the past
 > with python 1.5 I didn't get segfaults, but I did have a number of instances
 > of peculiar behaviour with pl_cont (contours would either be plotted or not
 > with minor rearrangements of the wrapper code).  Thus, I am hoping this
 > static fix will address those problems as well.  The static fix seems to have
 > no effect on pl_shade, but there may have been trouble lurking for us there
 > without that fix.
 > 
 > In the next day or so I am going to be greatly extending the xw09 contour
 > example so this should provide a pretty good test of whether our python
 > contour problems are finally over or not.
 > 
 > Does anybody here mind if I get rid of plmodule2.c and simply incorporate
 > its lines of code into plmodule.c?  The previous arrangement of separate
 > compilation of plmodule.c and plmodule2.c wasn't working very well and was
 > confusing.  For now, I have returned to including plmodule2.c in plmodule.c,
 > but as a final step I would like to simply incorporate its lines of code
 > into plmodule.c rather than including it.