I ran across this case of UnboundLocalError
recently, which seems strange:
import pprint
def main():
if 'pprint' in globals(): print 'pprint is in globals()'
pprint.pprint('Spam')
from pprint import pprint
pprint('Eggs')
if __name__ == '__main__': main()
Which produces:
pprint is in globals()
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "weird.py", line 9, in <module>
if __name__ == '__main__': main()
File "weird.py", line 5, in main
pprint.pprint('Spam')
UnboundLocalError: local variable 'pprint' referenced before assignment
pprint
is clearly bound in globals
, and is going to be bound in locals
in the following statement. Can someone offer an explanation of why it isn't happy resolving pprint
to the binding in globals
here?
Edit: Thanks to the good responses I can clarify my question with relevant terminology:
At compile time the identifier pprint
is marked as local to the frame. Does the execution model have no distinction where within the frame the local identifier is bound? Can it say, "refer to the global binding up until this bytecode instruction, at which point it has been rebound to a local binding," or does the execution model not account for this?
Where's the surprise? Any variable global to a scope that you reassign within that scope is marked local to that scope by the compiler.
If imports would be handled differently, that would be surprising imho.
It may make a case for not naming modules after symbols used therein, or vice versa, though.