Visitar URL original
doc: execution model - clear and complete example in documentation · Issue #48496 · python/cpython · GitHub
Skip to content

doc: execution model - clear and complete example in documentation #48496

Description

@robwolfe
mannequin
BPO 4246
Nosy @terryjreedy, @cben, @ezio-melotti
Files
  • scopes.py: Execution model example
  • Note: these values reflect the state of the issue at the time it was migrated and might not reflect the current state.

    Show more details

    GitHub fields:

    assignee = None
    closed_at = None
    created_at = <Date 2008-11-01.14:59:30.657>
    labels = ['type-feature', '3.9', '3.10', 'docs']
    title = 'doc: execution model - clear and complete example in documentation'
    updated_at = <Date 2020-10-25.22:53:29.725>
    user = 'https://bugs.python.org/robwolfe'

    bugs.python.org fields:

    activity = <Date 2020-10-25.22:53:29.725>
    actor = 'iritkatriel'
    assignee = 'docs@python'
    closed = False
    closed_date = None
    closer = None
    components = ['Documentation']
    creation = <Date 2008-11-01.14:59:30.657>
    creator = 'robwolfe'
    dependencies = []
    files = ['11924']
    hgrepos = []
    issue_num = 4246
    keywords = []
    message_count = 4.0
    messages = ['75441', '75614', '75635', '121783']
    nosy_count = 5.0
    nosy_names = ['terry.reedy', 'cben', 'ezio.melotti', 'robwolfe', 'docs@python']
    pr_nums = []
    priority = 'normal'
    resolution = None
    stage = 'needs patch'
    status = 'open'
    superseder = None
    type = 'enhancement'
    url = 'https://bugs.python.org/issue4246'
    versions = ['Python 3.9', 'Python 3.10']

    Linked PRs

    Activity

    1. robwolfe commented on Nov 1, 2008

      robwolfemannequin
      MannequinAuthor

      I'd like to propose adding some complete example regarding scopes and
      bindings resolving to execution model description.
      There is no week on pl.comp.lang.python without a question about
      UnboundLocalError problem. I'm getting tired answering that. ;-)
      It does not have to look so verbose as my (attached) example, but please
      add some example, which will clarify this issue.

    2. added
      docsDocumentation in the Doc dir
      type-featureA feature request or enhancement
      on Nov 1, 2008
    3. terryjreedy commented on Nov 7, 2008

      @terryjreedy
      Member

      Your example seem too verbose and diffuse. Perhaps something more
      focused on what people do wrong would be more helpful. I presume you
      mean something like this -- with or without x=2 before the def.

      >>> def f():
      	print (x)
      	x = 1
      
      >>> f()
      Traceback (most recent call last):
        File "<pyshell#31>", line 1, in <module>
          f()
        File "<pyshell#30>", line 2, in f
          print (x)
      UnboundLocalError: local variable 'x' referenced before assignment

      What are the other ways people get the error.

    4. robwolfe commented on Nov 8, 2008

      robwolfemannequin
      MannequinAuthor

      People seem to understand that they can not use variable before
      definition. But this dramatically change when they come across nested
      functions. They don't understand when variable can be resolved from
      outer scope and when can not, e.g:

      def outer():
          x = 1
          def inner1():
              print(x)
          def inner2():
              print(x)
              # [... some instructions (maybe a lot) ...]
              x = 1

      They are always confused why inner1 works but inner2 doesn't.

    5. cben commented on Nov 20, 2010

      cbenmannequin
      Mannequin

      The FAQ for this was much improved in 2009 (bpo-7290): http://docs.python.org/py3k/faq/programming.html#why-am-i-getting-an-unboundlocalerror-when-the-variable-has-a-value

      To support the claim that this keeps biting people, at least the following bug reports all came from people misundestanding this:
      bpo-10043
      bpo-9049
      bpo-7747
      bpo-7276
      bpo-6833
      bpo-5763
      bpo-4109 (understood effect of =, surprised by +=)
      bpo-972467
      bpo-850110
      bpo-463640
      These are just the people who were persistent enough to open a bug (and in most cases managed to produce a minimal example); many more ask on c.l.p, StackOverflow (>50 hits for UnboundLocalError, many of which are this exact issue) etc., or just give up.

      [Interesting point: people mostly complain when the unbound reference occurs textually *before* the assignment (though there's selection bias here), and many of them complain that things happen "out of order". It seems half the misunderstanding is that people expect variables to *become* localized when first assigned - they don't understand it's a static decision affecting all occurences in a function.]

      The central problem I believe is that when people try to modify a non-local var and get
      UnboundLocalError: local variable foo referenced before assignment
      their mental model of Python scopes is *wrong*, so the error message is *useless* for them (what 'local variable foo' is it talking about?), and have no idea where to look next.

      Also, I'm afraid people just won't internalize this issue until it bites them at least once (I've seen a Python course where I had explained this, with a print-before-assignment example, and 2 days later a student was bitten by the exception and was at a loss. Therefore, I think providing a clear learning path from UnboundLocalError is crucial.

      ==>

      I propose (i.e. am working on patch(s)) attacking it at many points:

      (1) Expand UnboundLocalError message to point to help('NAMESPACES')
      [Execution Model → Naming and Binding] and/or the FAQ.
      (requirement IMHO: use a help() ref that can be followed the
      from a Python prompt on an offline machine; not sure if FAQ can
      work this way.)

      (1B) Ideally, detect if the var is bound in outer/global scope 
           and suggest help('nonlocal') / help('global') approriately.
      
      (1C) Ideally, improve UnboundLocalError to explain "foo is local 
           throughout the function because it's bound at line 42".
      

      (2) Add an example to Naming and Binding section.
      Currently, it's a bunch of legalese, defining 7 terms(!) before
      you get to the meat. Mortal users won't survive that.
      Being the language spec, the precise legalese must stay there;
      but it'd be good to prepend it with a human-readable blurb and
      example regarding this issue.

      (3) Improve the tutorial. Sections 4.6 [Defining functions] and 9.2
      [Scopes and Namespaces] are relevant. 4.6 mentions the issue of
      assignment to global but neither section has a clear example.
      And 9.2 is scary IMHO; I'll see if I can make it any better...

      (4) Add examples to documentation of global & nonlocal?
      Not clear if helpful, probably too much.

    6. changed the title [-]execution model - clear and complete example in documentation[/-] [+]doc: execution model - clear and complete example in documentation[/+] on Oct 25, 2020
    7. transferred this issue fromon Apr 10, 2022
    8. added a commit that references this issue on Dec 22, 2022
    9. added 4 commits that reference this issue on Dec 22, 2022
    Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

    Metadata

    Metadata

    Assignees

    No one assigned

      Labels

      3.10 (EOL)end of life3.9 (EOL)end of lifedocsDocumentation in the Doc dirtype-featureA feature request or enhancement

      Projects

      No projects

        Milestone

        No milestone

        Relationships

        None yet

        Development

        No branches or pull requests

        Issue actions