[Python-Dev] Using and binding relative names (was Re: PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes)
Almann T. Goo
almann.goo at gmail.com
Sun Feb 26 08:15:20 CET 2006
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Sun Feb 26 08:15:20 CET 2006
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Using and binding relative names (was Re: PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Using and binding relative names (was Re: PEP forBetter Control of Nested Lexical Scopes)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On 2/26/06, Greg Ewing <greg.ewing at canterbury.ac.nz> wrote: > Alternatively, 'global' could be redefined to mean > what we're thinking of for 'outer'. Then there would > be no change in keywordage. > > There would be potential for breaking code, but I > suspect the actual amount of breakage would be > small, since there would have to be 3 scopes > involved, with something in the middle one > shadowing a global that was referenced in the > inner one with a global statement. > > Given the rarity of global statement usage to begin > with, I'd say that narrows things down to something > well within the range of acceptable breakage in 3.0. You read my mind--I made a reply similar to this on another branch of this thread just minutes ago :). I am curious to see what the community thinks about this. -Almann -- Almann T. Goo almann.goo at gmail.com
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Using and binding relative names (was Re: PEP for Better Control of Nested Lexical Scopes)
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Using and binding relative names (was Re: PEP forBetter Control of Nested Lexical Scopes)
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list