[Python-ideas] Tweaking closures and lexical scoping to include the function being defined
tjreedy at udel.edu
Thu Sep 29 00:46:15 CEST 2011
On 9/28/2011 5:57 PM, Jan Kaliszewski wrote:
> Terry Reedy dixit (2011-09-27, 21:17):
>> defining a function inside a loop
Insert 'does not', which somehow got omitted or deleted.
>> magically causes define-time binding of names in the body.
> No, it does not cause such a binding.
Of course not, as I have said many times over the last decade plus, most
recently just 4 hours earlier (at 17:10), when I said "People are
assuming [wrongly, when using a local name that matches an outer
enclosing loop name] that 'i' is immediately bound to its 'current'
value, just like default args."
Sorry for the confusing omission. My intention was to list this as a
delusion, not as a fact.
Terry Jan Reedy
More information about the Python-ideas