exec "def.." in globals(), locals() does not work

[xml0x1a at yahoo.com]

On Feb 19, 8:15 pm, "George Sakkis" <george.sak... at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 19, 10:52 pm, xml0... at yahoo.com wrote:
>
> > How do I use exec?
>
> Before you ask this question, the one you should have an answer for is
> "why do I (think I) have to use exec ?". At least for the example you
> gave, you don't; Python supports local functions and nested scopes,
> with no need for exec:
>
> from math import *
> G = 1
>
> def d():
>   L = 1
>   def f(x):
>     return L + log(G)
>   return f(1)
>
>
>
> >python -V
> > Python 2.4.3
>
> > ----
> > from math import *
> > G = 1
> > def d():
> >   L = 1
> >   exec "def f(x): return L + log(G) " in globals(), locals()
> >   f(1)
> > ----
>
> > How do I use exec() such that:
> > 1. A function defined in exec is available to the local scope (after
> > exec returns)
> > 2. The defined function f has access to globals (G and log(x) from
> > math)
> > 3. The defined function f has access to locals (L)
>
> > So far I have only been able to get 2 out of the 3 requirements.
> > It seems that exec "..." in locals(), globals() only uses the first
> > listed scope.
>
> > Bottomline:
> > exec "..." in globals(), locals(), gets me 1. and 3.
> > exec "..." in locals(), globals()  gets me 1. and 2.
> > exec "..." in hand-merged copy of the globals and locals dictionaries
> > gets me 2. and 3.
>
> > How do I get 1. 2. and 3.?
>
> L is local in d() only. As far as f() is concerned, L,G and log are
> all globals, only x is local (which you don't use; is this a typo?).
> If you insist on using exec (which, again, you have no reason to for
> this example), take the union of d's globals and locals as f's
> globals, and store f in d's locals():
>

Thanks! this works.
I tried to use g to merge locals and globals
But I didn't think of keeping the locals() so that f is visible in d.