From 7325fe67e4d7ce6abbb90ed9f3947c2cc871d827 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "Michael W. Hudson" Date: Fri, 7 Nov 2003 12:25:53 +0000 Subject: Backport of 1.26: Fix the problem addressed by patch [ 819012 ] Fix for former/latter confusion in Extending documentation although not by using supplied patch. Though this backport actually includes the fix that caused the problem in the first place! --- Doc/ext/extending.tex | 14 ++++++-------- 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/Doc/ext/extending.tex b/Doc/ext/extending.tex index 0761d97..1a43e1e 100644 --- a/Doc/ext/extending.tex +++ b/Doc/ext/extending.tex @@ -1174,14 +1174,12 @@ Examples (to the left the call, to the right the resulting Python value): \section{Reference Counts \label{refcounts}} -In languages like C or \Cpp, the programmer is responsible for -dynamic allocation and deallocation of memory on the heap. In C, -this is done using the functions \cfunction{malloc()} and -\cfunction{free()}. In \Cpp, the operators \keyword{new} and -\keyword{delete} are used with essentially the same meaning; they are -actually implemented using \cfunction{malloc()} and -\cfunction{free()}, so we'll restrict the following discussion to the -latter. +In languages like C or \Cpp, the programmer is responsible for dynamic +allocation and deallocation of memory on the heap. In C, this is done +using the functions \cfunction{malloc()} and \cfunction{free()}. In +\Cpp, the operators \keyword{new} and \keyword{delete} are used with +essentially the same meaning so we'll restrict the following +discussion to the C case. Every block of memory allocated with \cfunction{malloc()} should eventually be returned to the pool of available memory by exactly one -- cgit v0.12