Where do nested functions live?

Rob Williscroft rtw at freenet.co.uk
Wed Nov 1 11:51:29 CET 2006


Frederic Rentsch wrote in news:mailman.1556.1162316571.11739.python-
list at python.org in comp.lang.python:

> Rob Williscroft wrote:
>> Frederic Rentsch wrote in news:mailman.1536.1162292996.11739.python-
>>> Rob Williscroft wrote:
>>>> Frederic Rentsch wrote in news:mailman.1428.1162113628.11739.python-

[snip]

>>>>       
>>> Here I'm lost. What's the advantage of this? It looks more convoluted.
>>>     
>>
>> I'll agree that having to explicitly define a namespace class first 
>> does add some convolution. 
>>
>> But if you refer to having to prefix you "outer" variables with
>> "scope." then this would be the same as claiming that the explict use
>> of self is convoluted, which is a valid opinion, so fair enough, but
>> I can't say that I agree. 
>>
>>   
> 
> I didn't mean to call into question. I didn't understand the advantage 
> of the added complexity of your second example over the first.
> 

Ok, I missed your point, as for the second example it was an attempt 
to show that further refactoring from a function with local functions
that are sharing some state via the scope object, to a class with
methods that share state via the instance, is a matter of editing
a few lines.  

This is useful when a function grows too large (for some value of 
"too large"). As an added bonus you get to use the same thechniques
with both styles of coding.
 
[snip]

Rob.
-- 
http://www.victim-prime.dsl.pipex.com/



More information about the Python-list mailing list