Inner classes

[Bjorn Pettersen]

> From: Samuele Pedroni [mailto:pedroni at inf.ethz.ch]
> 
> Andrew Kuchling wrote:
> 
> > xyzmats at laplaza.org (Mats Wichmann) writes:
> > > Nonetheless, I was challenged by someone to describe how 
> it isn't a
> > > shorcoming in Python that classes don't work this way and didn't
> > > convince the guy so I'm looking for a more erudite comparison.
> >
> > Work *what* way?  It's perfectly legal to do this:
> >
> > class C:
> >     class inner:
> >         ... stuff for inner class
> >     ... stuff for class C
> >
> > --amk
> 
> Yes, but that's basically a static inner class, you can do
> 
> C().inner() but the created inner instance will not contain any
> implicitly created reference to the C instance.
> 
> To have that you must be explicit:
> c=C()
> i=C.inner(c)

Not true...

  from __future__ import nested_scopes

  class Outer:
    def foo(self):
      class inner:
        def bar(this):
          self.foo()
          this.bar()

bar can now reference both it's own class (inner) and the Outer class.
Not that this code is doing anything particularly useful though <wink>.

-- bjorn