New submission from Terry J. Reedy tjreedy@udel.edu:
This doc improvement suggestion is inspired by #991196 (and subsequent duplicates) and the current discussion on py-dev in the thread 'variable name resolution in exec is incorrect' (which is not a correct claim). I believe there is consensus that the doc for exec needs improving.
My suggestion (which others may amend) is that the following paragraph (from the 3.x builtin functions exec entry)
"In all cases, if the optional parts are omitted, the code is executed in the current scope. If only globals is provided, it must be a dictionary, which will be used for both the global and the local variables. If globals and locals are given, they are used for the global and local variables, respectively. If provided, locals can be any mapping object."
have these two sentences added:
"If only globals is provided or if onedict is provided as both globals and locals, the code is executed in a new top-level scope. If different objects are given as globals and locals, the code is executed as if it were in a class statement in a new top-level scope."
assignee: docs@python components: Documentation messages: 106552 nosy: docs@python, tjreedy priority: normal severity: normal status: open title: Improve documentation of exec versions: Python 2.6, Python 2.7, Python 3.1, Python 3.2
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Terry J. Reedy tjreedy@udel.edu added the comment:
To be super-clear, consider adding one more sentence, something like
"The result for code with def statements or lambda expressions may be different than it would be if the implied context were a function rather than a class."
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Changes by Nick Coghlan ncoghlan@gmail.com:
nosy: +ncoghlan
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Jordan Stadler jordan.stadler@gmail.com added the comment:
I'm going to update the documentation to include the scope information. Should be done within a day.
nosy: +jstadler
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Changes by Jordan Stadler jordan.stadler@gmail.com:
keywords: +patch Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file21960/exec_doc_touchup_2_x.patch
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Changes by Jordan Stadler jordan.stadler@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file21961/exec_doc_touchup_3_x.patch
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Jordan Stadler jordan.stadler@gmail.com added the comment:
Patches for 2.x and 3.x documentation related to 'exec'.
2.x Provides more information about scopes when using additional expressions for 'exec'. 2.x documentation for 'exec' is found in reference/simple_stmts. 3.x Provides more information about scopes when using additional expressions for 'exec'. 3.x documentation for 'exec' is found in library/functions.
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Changes by R. David Murray rdmurray@bitdance.com:
nosy: +r.david.murray
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Ezio Melotti ezio.melotti@gmail.com added the comment:
In 3.x exec is a function, so the reference to 'in' should be removed/updated. On 2.x
it might be better to just use in instead of :keyword:in,
because the latter probably links to the 'in' operator that checks for containment.
nosy: +ezio.melotti stage: -> patch review versions: +Python 3.3 -Python 2.6
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Changes by Jordan Stadler jordan.stadler@gmail.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file21961/exec_doc_touchup_3_x.patch
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Changes by Jordan Stadler jordan.stadler@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file21981/exec_doc_touchup_3.x.patch
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Changes by Jordan Stadler jordan.stadler@gmail.com:
Added file: http://bugs.python.org/file21982/exec_doc_touchup_2.x.patch
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Jordan Stadler jordan.stadler@gmail.com added the comment:
I've updated the 3.x patch, should be correct now.
I also updated the 2.x patch to use in. :keyword:in was used
in an earlier part of the paragraph I modified, so I have changed both for
consistency.
This is the paragraph before modification:
"
In all cases, if the optional parts are omitted, the code is executed in the
current scope. If only the first expression after :keyword:in is
specified,
it should be a dictionary, which will be used for both the global and the local
variables. If two expressions are given, they are used for the global and local
variables, respectively. If provided, locals can be any mapping object.
"
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Changes by Jordan Stadler jordan.stadler@gmail.com:
Removed file: http://bugs.python.org/file21960/exec_doc_touchup_2_x.patch
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Changes by Ezio Melotti ezio.melotti@gmail.com:
nosy: +mark.dickinson type: -> enhancement versions: +Python 3.4 -Python 3.1
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Mark Dickinson added the comment:
Should this be closed as a duplicate of issue #13557?
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Changes by Mark Dickinson dickinsm@gmail.com:
resolution: -> duplicate status: open -> closed superseder: -> exec of list comprehension fails on NameError
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Terry J. Reedy added the comment:
I suggested more change here than I committed in #13557. I would like to think about the extra a bit more. The issue about def in exec just came up again on python-list, but I do not really like the third sentence I suggested.
assignee: docs@python -> terry.reedy
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Mark Dickinson added the comment:
Okay; sorry about that. Reopening.
resolution: duplicate -> status: closed -> open
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org http://bugs.python.org/issue8824
Terry J. Reedy tjreedy@udel.edu added the comment:
I decided that the alternate addition in #13557 is enough.
resolution: -> out of date stage: patch review -> resolved status: open -> closed versions: -Python 2.7
Python tracker report@bugs.python.org https://bugs.python.org/issue8824
-
Ezio Melotti -
Jordan Stadler
-
Mark Dickinson
-
Nick Coghlan
-
R. David Murray
-
Terry J. Reedy