RetroSearch Browse

Wed Jul 5 16:16:15 CEST 2006 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-July/067017.html

Simon Percivall wrote:

> On 5 jul 2006, at 11.40, Scott Dial wrote:
> > Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >> Would this also use ..num to refer to num in an outer scope two  
> >> levels removed?
> >
> > I realize this was a wink, but it is a valid problem with the
> > "dot"-proposal.
> >
> > def foo(n):
> >    def bar(n):
> >      def baz():
> >        return .n
> >
> > So, which 'n' outer 'n' is being referenced? Seems like you need to
> > either be able to do multiple dots (ugly, hard to read) or only do a
> > single-step outwards reference. But then that has it's own  
> > problems, if
> > I meant the 'n' passed into 'foo', then I have to resort to such
> > nonsense as:
> <snip>
> 
> No, it's actually not a problem. foo()'s "n" should just be
> hidden. If you don't want it to be hidden, don't write your
> function that way. If you find you need deeply nested functions
> where local names shadow names in outer scopes that you need to
> access you might want to think of another way to solve your
> problem.

+1, YAGNI.

Just

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2006-July/067017.html below:

[Python-Dev] Explicit Lexical Scoping (pre-PEP?)