* markolopa:
On 18 Sep, 10:36, "markol...@gmail.com" <markol...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sep 11, 7:36 pm, Johan Grönqvist <johan.gronqv...@gmail.com> wrote:
I find several places in my code where I would like tohavea variable
scope that is smaller than the enclosing function/class/module definition.
This is one of the single major frustrations I have with Python and an
important source of bugs for me. Here is a typical situation
Here is another bug that I just got. Twenty minutes lost to find it...
class ValueColumn(AbstractColumn):
def __init__(self, name, header, domain_names):
if type(domain_names) != tuple:
raise ValueError('a tuple of domain names must be given')
for name in domain_names:
if type(name) != str:
raise ValueError('a tuple of domain names must be
given')
self.domain_names = domain_names
super(ValueColumn, self).__init__(name, header)
The upper class was initialized with the wrong name, because the for
loop to check
domain_names used "name" which is also the argument to be passed.
If is an old thread but I am reopening to present real situation where
this Python
"feature" bothers me...
I think if one could somehow declare names as const (final, readonly, whatever)
then that would cover the above plus much more.
Cheers,
- Alf
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
