3 ms·
In short, in your opinion, Python has no "complete" closures because you cannot bind a new value to the name from enclosing lexical scope from within a nested s
by klibertp 14y ago
In short, in your opinion, Python has no "complete" closures because you cannot bind a new value to the name from enclosing lexical scope from within a nested scope. I disagree.
- effn 14y agoThis is not possible in Haskell either. You never hear people claiming Haskell doesn't support closures.
- klibertp 14y agoWhich is why I disagree with claims that Python doesn't support them either. It does, of course; we could argue if Python supports "complete" closures, but we won't, because we know better than to use meaningless terms in discussion, right?
- koide 14y agoIn any case it's not been the case in a while, so I stand corrected. Although being able to write on the closed over variable is a neat feature to have, I would argue that feature does make a difference. Whether you call that complete or read-write or however you want to.