RetroSearch Browse

Mon Oct 27 12:28:33 EST 2003 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/039634.html

> if I understand 'global x in f' will introduce a local x in f even if there
> is none, for symmetry with global. Maybe this has already been answered
> (this thread is getting too long, and is this change scheduled for 2.4 or 
> 3.0?) but
> 
> x = 'global'
> 
> def f():
>    def init():
>      global x in f
>      x = 'in f'
>    init()
>    print x
> 
> f()
> 
> will this print 'global' or 'in f' ? I can argument both ways which is not 
> a good thing.

The compiler does a full analysis so it will know that init() refers
to a cell for x in f's locals, and hence it will print 'in f'.  For
the purposes of deciding which variables live where, the presence of
'global x in f' inside an inner function (whether or not there's a
matching assignment) is equivalent to the presence of an assignment to
x in f's body.

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2003-October/039634.html below:

[Python-Dev] replacing 'global'