Re^7: Nesting Functions

yes there's hoisting happening in Python (though hoisting might be a JS term)

OK if you want to define "lexical" by the order of statements inside a scope, (our is a good example) than let's compromise on "private" .

Both Perl and Python have private variables.

in Perl they are also called "lexical vars" and declared with my for the rest of the scope
in Python they are called "local vars" and implicitly declared while assigning in a function scope or some obscure comprehensions for the full scope, even up-wards

OK?

Cheers Rolf
_{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :)

Wikisyntax for the Monastery
FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice}

Comment on Re^7: Nesting Functions

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^8: Nesting Functions by Eily (Monsignor) on Jul 19, 2019 at 14:58 UTC
My "OK" is on your edit where variables in python are now described as being similar to my, rather than implying that they are equivalent ;-). As a compromise, I can also change my statement into: Python doesn't have sane lexicals.	[reply]
Re^9: Nesting Functions by LanX (Saint) on Jul 19, 2019 at 15:11 UTC
> on your edit where variables in python are now described as being similar to my not sure if I introduced "similar" now, but I certainly wrote "More or less" right from the begining! :-P I think it's a bit messy that we use "lexical" for scope and variable in Perl. That's why the documentation for `our` is confusing, it binds a symbol inside a lexical scope to a non-lexical variable. > Python doesn't have sane lexicals. Everything has a price, code looks tidier but no chance to have strict checking. Cheers Rolf _{(addicted to the Perl Programming Language :) Wikisyntax for the Monastery FootballPerl is like chess, only without the dice}	[reply]