Re: [PATCH/RFC] Fix refcount on some Python callbacks

David Glasser wrote:
> David James posted a patch to help with something similar (editors,
> not callbacks):

Comparing my approach to his, it looks to me like he would add
references to the pools while I would have added those references to
python objects. I guess the former more closely resembles the native
workings of C with APR, while the latter is more in the Python style.

> I didn't really feel qualified to know if it was the right solution
> though, and ended up dropping it.

I'm a newcomer to Python, have never really worked with APR, so I
wouldn't be "qualified" in any way either. On the other hand, I would
assume that most attempts at a fix, even if not in the best of styles,
would be better than the segmentation faults that occur now.

Greetings,
  Martin