Peter Otten於 2019年9月20日星期五 UTC+8下午3時31分48秒寫道：
> jf...@ms4.hinet.net wrote:
>
> >>>> x = 3
> >>>> def foo():
> > ... exec("print(globals(), locals()); x = x + 1; print(globals(),
> > locals())") ...
> >>>> fo
jf...@ms4.hinet.net wrote:
>>>> x = 3
>>>> def foo():
> ... exec("print(globals(), locals()); x = x + 1; print(globals(),
> locals())") ...
>>>> foo()
> {'foo': , '__package__': None, '__builtins__':
> {, '__loader__': {'_froz
>>> x = 3
>>> def foo():
... exec("print(globals(), locals()); x = x + 1; print(globals(),
locals())")
...
>>> foo()
{'foo': , '__package__': None, '__builtins__':
, '__loader__': , '__doc__': None, '__name__': '__main__',
'__spec__': None, 'x'
Am Donnerstag, 19. September 2019 20:24:49 UTC+2 schrieb Peter Otten:
> Eko palypse wrote:
>
> > Am Donnerstag, 19. September 2019 18:31:43 UTC+2 schrieb Peter Otten:
> >> Eko palypse wrote:
> >>
> >> > No, I have to correct myself
> >> >
> >> > x = 5
> >> > def f1():
> >> > exec("x = x +
Eko palypse wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 19. September 2019 18:31:43 UTC+2 schrieb Peter Otten:
>> Eko palypse wrote:
>>
>> > No, I have to correct myself
>> >
>> > x = 5
>> > def f1():
>> > exec("x = x + 1; print('f1 in:', x)")
>> > return x
>> > print('f1 out', f1())
>> >
>> > results in
Am Donnerstag, 19. September 2019 18:31:43 UTC+2 schrieb Peter Otten:
> Eko palypse wrote:
>
> > No, I have to correct myself
> >
> > x = 5
> > def f1():
> > exec("x = x + 1; print('f1 in:', x)")
> > return x
> > print('f1 out', f1())
> >
> > results in the same, for me confusing,
First thank you for all the answers, very much appreciated.
I assume the root cause might be explained by the zen of python as well.
If the implementation is hard to explain, it's a bad idea.
Maybe I need to rethink my implementation :-)
Eren
--
Eko palypse wrote:
> No, I have to correct myself
>
> x = 5
> def f1():
> exec("x = x + 1; print('f1 in:', x)")
> return x
> print('f1 out', f1())
>
> results in the same, for me confusing, results.
>
> f1 in: 6
> f1 out 5
Inside a function exec assignments go to a *copy* of the local
No, I have to correct myself
x = 5
def f1():
exec("x = x + 1; print('f1 in:', x)")
return x
print('f1 out', f1())
results in the same, for me confusing, results.
f1 in: 6
f1 out 5
Eren
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
Eko palypse wrote:
> Thank you, I'm currently investigating importlib and read that
> __builtins__ might be another alternative.
> My ultimate goal would be to have objects available without the need to
> import them, regardless whether used in a script directly or used in an
> imported module.
Richard Damon wrote:
> On 9/19/19 6:16 AM, Eko palypse wrote:
>>> In all cases, if the optional parts are omitted, the code is executed in
>>> the current scope. ...
>>>
>>>
>>> You can see from it that "globals" is optional.
>>> And that, if "globals" is missing, then
>>> "exec" is executed in
I’m not the OP, but I want to thank you for that clarification. I had
previously not understood the ramifications of the following in section “7.
Simple statements” in “The Python Language Reference”:
“An augmented assignment expression like x += 1 can be rewritten as x = x + 1
to achieve a
On 9/19/19 6:52 AM, Eko palypse wrote:
> Am Donnerstag, 19. September 2019 12:45:35 UTC+2 schrieb Richard Damon:
>> On 9/19/19 6:16 AM, Eko palypse wrote:
In all cases, if the optional parts are omitted, the code is executed in
the current scope. ...
You can see from it
Am Donnerstag, 19. September 2019 12:56:59 UTC+2 schrieb Peter Otten:
> Eko palypse wrote:
>
> >> Then it should be clear that the name 'test01' is put into globals(), if
> >> load_module() doesn't throw an exception. No sharing or nesting of
> >> namespaces takes place.
> >
> > Thank you too
Eko palypse wrote:
>> Then it should be clear that the name 'test01' is put into globals(), if
>> load_module() doesn't throw an exception. No sharing or nesting of
>> namespaces takes place.
>
> Thank you too for your answer. Ok, that means that in every case when exec
> imports something it
Am Donnerstag, 19. September 2019 12:45:35 UTC+2 schrieb Richard Damon:
> On 9/19/19 6:16 AM, Eko palypse wrote:
> >> In all cases, if the optional parts are omitted, the code is executed in
> >> the current scope. ...
> >>
> >>
> >> You can see from it that "globals" is optional.
> >> And that,
On 9/19/19 6:16 AM, Eko palypse wrote:
>> In all cases, if the optional parts are omitted, the code is executed in the
>> current scope. ...
>>
>>
>> You can see from it that "globals" is optional.
>> And that, if "globals" is missing, then
>> "exec" is executed in the current scope ("f1" in your
> Then it should be clear that the name 'test01' is put into globals(), if
> load_module() doesn't throw an exception. No sharing or nesting of
> namespaces takes place.
Thank you too for your answer. Ok, that means that in every case when exec
imports something it has its own global namespace,
> In all cases, if the optional parts are omitted, the code is executed in the
> current scope. ...
>
>
> You can see from it that "globals" is optional.
> And that, if "globals" is missing, then
> "exec" is executed in the current scope ("f1" in your case).
Thank you for your answer, and that
Eko palypse wrote:
> exec('import test01', globals())
> print('f3 out', x)
>
> # result exception, expected but because f1 didn't throw an exception
> # I'm confused. module test01 has only this two lines
> x += 1
> print('f3 in:', x)
The lines above run in the test01's global namespace, not in
Eko palypse writes:
> Why does f1 work? I've expected an exception as no global dict has been
> provided
> ...
>def f1(...):
> exec("...")
>...
The documentation ("https://docs.python.org/3/library/functions.html#exec;)
tells you:
exec(object[, glo
Why does f1 work? I've expected an exception as no global dict has been
provided, and why does throw f3 an exception if it does, more or less, the same
as f1?
x += 5
def f1():
exec("x += 1; print('f1 in:', x)")
return x
print('f1 out', f1())
# result => f1 in: 6
# result => f1 out 5
22 matches
Mail list logo
