Peter Otten <__pete...@web.de> writes: > I don't know how to express it more clearly, so here's another example: > >>>> def f(): > ... def g(): return a * a > ... def h(): return a + a > ... a = 5 > ... return g, h > ... >>>> g, h = f() >>>> g(), h() > (25, 10)
IMHO this whole confusion just shows that mingling assignment and binding makes understanding scope harder. In Python, the first assignment inside a function body also creates a binding (unless told not to do so by global) the scope of which is the _whole_ of the function body. A variable reference refers to the lexically innermost surrounding binding of said variable. Now, while it might seem that some magic happens in the example on the return of the function, this is in fact not so, since the assignment "a = 5" actually creates a binding for /a/ that is visible from the body of /g/, because the lexical scope of the binding is the whole body of /f/, so that the capture of the variable happens inside of the def expression (as one would expect) and not on return as you seem to imply. Slightly OT -- the above also explains why closed over variables are read only in Python. An assignment inside a closure would implicitly create a binding, so that all (even previous) references to that variable would refer to this new binding. > I think this behaviour is also called "late binding". "Retroactive implicit scope" would be closer. -- A change in perspective is worth 80 IQ points. --- Alan Kay -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
