Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #55699

Re: Parameterized functions of no arguments?

Show all headers | View raw

Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com> writes:

> It's a well-known problem due to the intricacies of Python's scoping
> rules.

Actually, it is not specific to Python's scoping rules (which mandate
local, then module-level, then built-in name lookup).  The root of the
surprise is, as you correctly point out, the fact that the variable's
"cell" is shared by all iterations through the loop.  Taking that into
account, it logically follows that all enclosed functions end up reading
the same value.

This is not endemic to Python, the exact same surprise is present in
Common Lisp, a language with long tradition of closures and otherwise
radically different scoping rules.

* (setq l (loop for i from 1 to 10 collect (lambda () i)))
* (mapcar #'funcall l)
(11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11 11)

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Parameterized functions of no arguments? Rotwang <sg552@hotmail.co.uk> - 2011-02-11 04:54 +0000
  Re: Parameterized functions of no arguments? Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@xemacs.org> - 2011-02-11 15:43 +0100
  Re: Parameterized functions of no arguments? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2011-02-10 23:22 -0800
  Re: Parameterized functions of no arguments? Carl Banks <pavlovevidence@gmail.com> - 2011-02-11 05:59 +0000
  Re: Parameterized functions of no arguments? Chris Rebert <clp2@rebertia.com> - 2011-02-10 21:50 -0800
  Re: Parameterized functions of no arguments? Rotwang <sg552@hotmail.co.uk> - 2011-02-11 05:26 +0000

csiph-web