Ron Adam wrote: > Ron Adam wrote: > >> And accessing an undefined name returned None instead of a NameError? > > I retract this. ;-) > > It's not a good idea. But assigning to None as a way to unbind a name > may still be an option.
IMO, it isn't. This would completely preclude the usage of None as a value. None is mostly used as a "null value". The most prominent example is default function arguments: def foo(bar, baz=None): With None unbinding the name, what would you suggest should happen? baz being undefined in the function scope? Or, what should happen for somedict[1] = None The same as del somedict[1] ? Also, the concept of _assigning_ something to a name to actually _unassign_ the name is completely wrong. Of course, this is a possible way to unassign names if (and only if) (1) there is a real "undefined" value (not None) (2) unbound names return the undefined value Look at Perl. Do we want to be like that? ;) Reinhold -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
