[Python-Dev] LOAD_NAME & classes

Jeremy Hylton jeremy@zope.com
Mon, 22 Apr 2002 14:21:45 -0400

>>>>> "GvR" == Guido van Rossum <guido@python.org> writes:

> def f(x):
>     class Foo:
>         x = x
> and 
> x = 1
> class Foo:
>     x = x

  GvR> I just tried this in 2.1 (without nested scopes enabled) and
  GvR> there the first example fails too.

I think you misunderstood my original explanation.  With the current
implementations, the first example fails and the second example
works.  I think the bug is that the second example works.

  GvR> While it's slightly confusing, it's consistent with the rule
  GvR> that class bodies don't play the nested scopes game, and I
  GvR> think it shouldn't be fixed.  Otherwise you'd have the
  GvR> confusing issue that a function inside a class can't see the
  GvR> class scope, but a class inside a function can see the function
  GvR> scope.  Better if neither can see the other.

None of the documentation suggests that class and functions don't see
each other.  Rather, it says the free variables are resolved in the
nearest enclosing function scope.  The current implementation supports
resolution of free variables in class scope, e.g.

def f(x):
    class Foo:
        print x

>>> f(3)

I think the problem is with x = x, which ought to be an error if x is
a local and x is unbound.  The code will succeed, nested or otherwise,
if x happens to be a module global.  The confusion is that the code
will not succeed if x is defined in an enclosing, non-top-level