On Sat, Jan 23, 2016 at 10:27 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull
<stephen@xemacs.org> wrote:
> Guido,
>
> Thank you for taking the trouble to address my rather confused post.

You're welcome. And thanks for taking it as constructive criticism.

> Guido van Rossum writes:
>
>  > If I were to deconstruct the original statement, I would start by
>  > replacing the list comprehension with a plain old for loop.
>
> I did that.  But that actually doesn't bother me because the loop
> index's identifier doesn't go out of scope.  I now see why that's a
> red herring, but maybe documentation can be improved.
>
> Anyway, I wrote that post before seeing your explanation that things
> just aren't that difficult, they all follow from "variable reference
> as dictionary lookup".  The clue I needed was the way to view a scope
> as an object, and then realize that all free variable references are
> the same, except for visibility of the relevant scope to the other
> code at the call site.
>
> For me it's now a documentation issue (I know why the comprehension of
> lambdas work as they do, and I also know how to get the "expected",
> more useful result).  I'll go take a look at the language reference,
> and tutorial, and see if I think they can be improved.

I expect that the tutorial just needs some touch-up or an extra
section on these issues. But the language reference... Well, it's a
mess, it is often confusing and not all that exact. I should take a
year off to rewrite it from scratch (what a book that would be!), but
I don't have the kind of discipline to finish long writing projects.
:-(

--
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list
Python-ideas@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-ideas
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/