On 5/27/2019 9:52 AM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 5/27/19 9:12 AM, Terry Reedy wrote: >> I believe that the situation is or can be thought of as this: there is >> exactly 1 function locals dict. per function invocation, or more generally, as Guido said, per stack frame. This part is obvious to me, but I should have been clearer. >> Initially, it is empty and >> inaccessible (unusable) from code. Each locals() call updates the >> dict to a current snapshot and returns it. >> > I had a similar concern, and one BIG issue with it being define this way > is that you get a fundamental re-entrancy problem. If module a uses > locals(), and then calls module b that uses locals(), module a has lost > its usage. No. Sorry about being unclear. -- Terry Jan Reedy
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