2 questions about scope
Alex Martelli
aleaxit at yahoo.com
Mon Oct 25 16:53:39 EDT 2004
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Mon Oct 25 16:53:39 EDT 2004
- Previous message (by thread): 2 questions about scope
- Next message (by thread): fastest table lookup
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Andrew Dalke <adalke at mindspring.com> wrote: ... > but you really shouldn't. Or use a function scope, > > i = "something" > def scope(): > for i in range(100): > ... > scope() > > I mostly use the last when I want some non-trivial > initialization in my module and don't want the various > variables hanging around in the process space. I'll > also follow it up with a "del scope" so that no one > can reference the initialization code. Execution in function scope is also generally quite a bit faster than execution at module scope or in class scope. Any nontrivial code in module scope is best scooped up into a function, which is then executed and removed. I'd suggest naming the function '_init' or something like that -- with a leading underscore to indicate to the reader of the source that it's a private implementation detail (not _needed_, since you're gonna delete it after running it once, but helpful to the reader at no cost to the code's author). Alex
- Previous message (by thread): 2 questions about scope
- Next message (by thread): fastest table lookup
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list