On Tue, 13 Dec 2011 10:54:51 +0100, Jean-Michel Pichavant wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 12:13:33 +0100, Jean-Michel Pichavant wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Using the same name for 2 different objects is a bad idea in general.
>>>
>>>
>> We have namespaces precisely so you don't need to care about making
>> names globally unique.
>>
>>
>>
> I don't get your point, namespaced names are unique, by definition.
>
> foo.aname <> bar.aname
Assuming foo and bar are not names for the same object, there are at
least three namespaces here: the local namespace, where foo and bar can
be found, the foo.__dict__ namespace, and the bar.__dict__ namespace.
> The OP showed a code where there was a confusion between a global name
> and a local one. There's no namespace involved. Having a local name
> identical to a global one is a bad idea, def.
Of course there are namespaces involved. There is the global namespace,
and the local namespace. That's how you can have x inside a function
without it overwriting global x outside of it, because they are different
namespaces. Which is my point.
When I write this:
x = 1
def spam():
x = 2
def ham():
x = 3
The three x's don't clash because they are in three separate namespaces.
--
Steven
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
