Hrvoje Niksic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > In real-life code, closures are used to implement callbacks with > automatic access to their lexical environment without the need for the > bogus additional "void *" argument one so often sees in C callbacks, > and without communication through global variables. If the callbacks > can access variables in the outer scope, it's only logical (and > useful) for them to be able to change them. Prohibiting modification > reduces the usefulness of closures and causes ugly workarounds such as > the avar[0] pattern. >
In real life code methods are used to implement callbacks with automatic access to their environment without the need for any C type hacks. What is your point here? Python isn't C (or Javascript). If you have a function which takes a callback in Python you just pass it a bound method and you have all the context you want without resorting to ugly workrounds. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
