RetroSearch Browse

Sun Oct 26 22:31:12 EST 2003 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/039603.html

> From: Greg Ewing [mailto:greg at cosc.canterbury.ac.nz]
> 
> > Is that compatible with current use?  I think the current 
> semantics are that
> > global <name> always binds name to an object with that name 
> at module scope.
> 
> No, it's not quite compatible, but I don't think
> it's likely to break anything much in practice.

I'm almost 100% sure that it will. People tend to use the same short variable names for things, and nested functions had *better* be related ...

We could not use an unadorned 'global' for such a change in semantics. It would require a new keyword.

Tim Delaney

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/039603.html below:

[Python-Dev] closure semantics