On 6/30/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 6/30/06, Steven Bethard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > BJörn Lindqvist wrote:
> > > I have often wanted something similar to that for global
> > > variables, instead of the global declaration:
> > >
> > > cache = None
> > > def init():
> > > if not global.cache:
> > > global.cache = init_cache()
> >
> > Redirected since this seemed like a Python 3000 kind of request. I
> > like the idea, particularly because it coincides well with my usual
> > uses for global/globals(). Seems like it might require some changes
> > in things like eval and exec that take locals and globals dicts, but I
> > don't know how much of a drawback that is.
>
> You realize that *reading* a global doesn't need the "global." prefix,
> do you? So you could have written "if not cache: global.cache =
> init_cache()" in the function body.
That's also true for the global statement, right? That is, the ``if
not cache`` part would not need a global statement, whlie the ``cache
= init_cache()`` part would.
That said, I agree it does nothing to solve the asymmetry.
STeVe
--
I'm not *in*-sane. Indeed, I am so far *out* of sane that you appear a
tiny blip on the distant coast of sanity.
--- Bucky Katt, Get Fuzzy
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
