Talin wrote: > One thing I don't understand in this discussion of re-purposing the > 'global' keyword is how you handle the case of an inner function that > *creates* a global. > > Right now, you can create a global variable from within a scope, even if > that variable hasn't been declared yet: > > def foo(): > global x > x = 1 > > foo() > print x > > However, if 'global' is simply a synonym for 'nonlocal', then how does > it know *which* scope to create the variable in?
since what's a free variable and not is determined by static analysis, and free variables are "owned" by the innermost scope they're used in, I'm not sure why you even asking that question. </F> _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list Python-3000@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
