global and None

[Francis Avila]

Paul McGuire wrote in message ...
>> Hmm, I hadn't thought of that.  If this is a use case, aren't the
>> restrictions placed on global in the specs rather encumbering, and should
>be
>> removed? (Well, except for for-loop targets and formal parameters.)  As
it
>> is, to comply, you'd have to use a temporary name for construction, and
>then
>> assign to the global name.
>> --
>> Francis Avila
>>
>¿Que?
>
>What needs to be changed? See the example code that I posted.  This is
>exactly where "global" makes sense.

I was thinking of e.g. an expensive class definition, but I didn't think
deeply enough.  Never mind.
--
Francis Avila