I think you missed this statement, even though you quoted it. On 2011-06-01 10:51, Paul Moore wrote:
On 1 June 2011 09:26, Carl M. Johnson <cmjohnson.mailinglist@gmail.com> wrote:
We all agree that if there's an x= somewhere in the function body, then we have to treat the variable as a local.
This means that your example:
x = 1 def f(): # The next statement uses the global x x += 1 x = 2 # From here, you have a local x
Would behave exactly as it does today under the proposed new semantics. Specifically, the "x = 2" statement (and the lack of a nonlocal statement) forces x to be local throughout the function, and the "x += 1" statement then tries to read the local "x" and fails.
That fundamentally changes the language semantics.
I don't think it does. It only makes a difference for functions that contains an augmented assignment to a name without also containing a regular assignment to that name. This case will change from being an error to doing something well-defined and useful. FWIW, I'm +1 on the idea. Best regards - Jacob