Unexpected result.

[Andrew Dalke]

Grzegorz Dostatni wrote:
 > My question is whether it would make more sense (be more
> intuitive) to have a for loop create its own local scope. (ie. an output
> string of
> 1 2 3 a 1 2 3 b 1 2 3 c

If for loops created a new local scope then the following
would not work

for i in range(10):
   if data[i] == "stop":
     break
else:
   return None
print "Found at position", i
   .. continue to work with that position ..

In Python only functions, modules, and classes
create a new scope (at least syntax-wise)

If you really, really want a scope there you
can do this

 >>> for i in range(5):
...   class Spam:
...     for i in "ABC":
...       print i,
...     print "At end -->", i
...     del i
...     print "After del -->", i
...     i = "qwerty"  # show that 'i' gets removed
...   print "After end of class scope", i
...
A B C At end --> C
After del --> 0
After end of class scope 0
A B C At end --> C
After del --> 1
After end of class scope 1
A B C At end --> C
After del --> 2
After end of class scope 2
A B C At end --> C
After del --> 3
After end of class scope 3
A B C At end --> C
After del --> 4
After end of class scope 4
 >>>

Strange, but it works.  I don't think I've seen
anyone use this in real code, and I don't really
advise you do either.

				Andrew
				dalke at dalkescientific.com