scope-resolution
Joshua Rosen
Joshua.Rosen at p98.f112.n480.z2.fidonet.org
Thu Jul 1 13:31:17 EDT 1999
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Thu Jul 1 13:31:17 EDT 1999
- Previous message (by thread): scope-resolution
- Next message (by thread): Tkinter just WON'T work right!
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
From: Joshua Rosen <rozzin at geekspace.com> Eckh--apparently, I had a dead-brain day, and took you much too seriously. Of course, there's got to be someone out there who needed to here that stuff.... I imagine that you were using typing as a metaphor for scoping, and, now that I see it, I can appreciate it. It would be nice to have some non-mandatory scope-resolution capabilities beyond self-referencing in instance-methods and `global' statements. What would be a different way of getting the effect of: ClassX.foo(ClassY()) ? Have bound and unbound methods be different creatures, perhaps.... No, never mind, I suppose--thinking about it, so long as you can assure `this variable is a class variable', then everything should be fine. Actually, just adding the instance's namespace to the list of namespaces searched, in methods, shouldn't be too bad to implement, and probably wouldn't break any of the existing code, eh? [function locals, instance locals, globals]? -Rozzin.
- Previous message (by thread): scope-resolution
- Next message (by thread): Tkinter just WON'T work right!
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list