[Python-Dev] PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes
Almann T. Goo
almann.goo at gmail.com
Thu Feb 23 02:12:29 CET 2006
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Thu Feb 23 02:12:29 CET 2006
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
> Oddly, in Python, 'global' isn't actually necessary, > since the module can always import itself and use > attribute access. > > Clearly, though, Guido must have thought at the time > that it was worth providing an alternative way. I believe that use cases for rebinding globals (module attributes) from within a module are more numerous than rebinding in an enclosing lexical scope (although rebinding a name in the global scope from a local scope is really just a specific case of that). I would think this was probably a motivator for the 'global' key word to avoid clumsier workarounds. Since there were no nested lexical scopes back then, there was no need to have a construct for arbitrary enclosing scopes. -Almann -- Almann T. Goo almann.goo at gmail.com
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes
- Next message: [Python-Dev] PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list