> > Walter suggested 'global.x = 23' which looks reasonable; unfortunately
> > my parser can't do this without removing the existing global statement
> > from the Grammar: after seeing the token 'global' it must be able to
> > make a decision about whether to expand this to a global statement or
> > an assignment without peeking ahead, and that's impossible.
>
> Couldn't this be solved by making 'global<whitespace>.' a token?
>
> Should {get|has}attr(global, 'foo') be possible?
Yes, I think if we go this path, global should behave as a predefined
variable. Maybe we should call it __globals__ after all, consistent
with __file__ and __name__ (it would create a cycle, but we have
plenty of those already).
Though I still wish it didn't need underscores. Maybe 'globals' could
sprout __getattribute__ and __setattr__ methods that would delegate to
the current global module?
--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4