Develop Reference

Python: calling a child function using a string

Does anyone know how to call a child function that belongs to a parent function using the dot operator, but where the child function's name is stored in a string variable.
def parent_function():
# do something
def child_function():
# do something else
Now imagine I have a string called 'child_function'. Is there a way to do this:
method_name = 'child_function'
parent_function.method_name()
I understand that method_name is a string and so it is not callable. The syntax above is clearly wrong, but I wanted to know if there was a way to do this?
Thank you!

As others have pointed out in comments there will need to be a little more setup to actually call an inner function, such as a parameter like this:
def parent_function(should_call=False):
# do something
def child_function():
print("I'm the child")
if should_call:
child_function()
That being said, and to answer your specific question, you technically can call the inner function directly. I should note this is bad and you should not be doing this. You can access the inner function via the outer function's code object
exec(parent_function.__code__.co_consts[1])

As opposed to many comments, you can actually access inner functions even if the outer function is not in the system memory anymore. This technique in python is called closure.
To know more about closure, visit Programiz
Coming to your requirement, you need to call the nested method outside the nesting function.
What are we leveraging?
Closure technique of python
locals() method which returns all the local properties and methods inside an enclosing method.
lambda x: x, A anonymous (Lambda) function
def parent_function():
# do something
def child_function():
# do something else
print("child_function got invoked")
return {i: j for i, j in locals().items() if type(j) == type(lambda x: x)}
# locals() returns all the properties and nested methods inside an enclosing method.
# We are filtering out only the methods / funtions and not properties / variables
parent_function()["child_function"]()
The below is the output.
>>> child_function got invoked
Better Solution:
Instead of using nested methods, leverage the concept of classes provided by Python.
Enclose the nested functions as methods inside a class.

If you include global child_function in parent_function, then once you run parent_function, you can call child_function in the main program. It's not a very clean way of defining functions, though. If you want a function defined in the main program, then you should define it in the main program.

Consider the following case:
def parent_function():
a = 1
Can you access a from the global scope? No, because it is a local variable. It is only existent while parent_function runs, and forgotten after.
Now, in python, a function is stored in a variable just like any other value. child_function is a local variable just like a. Thus, it is in principle not possible to access it from outside parent_function.
Edit: unless you make it available to the outside somehow, e.g. by returning it. But then, still the name child_function is internal to parent_function.
Edit 2: You can get functions given by name (as string) by using the locals() and globals() dictionaries.
def my_function():
print "my function!"
func_name = "my_function"
f = globals()[func_name]
f()

Get functions' previous return statement [duplicate]

Suppose I have a function like:
def foo():
x = 'hello world'
How do I get the function to return x, in such a way that I can use it as the input for another function or use the variable within the body of a program? I tried using return and then using the x variable in another function, but I get a NameError that way.
For the specific case of communicating information between methods in the same class, it is often best to store the information in self. See Passing variables between methods in Python? for details.

def foo():
x = 'hello world'
return x # return 'hello world' would do, too
foo()
print(x) # NameError - x is not defined outside the function
y = foo()
print(y) # this works
x = foo()
print(x) # this also works, and it's a completely different x than that inside
# foo()
z = bar(x) # of course, now you can use x as you want
z = bar(foo()) # but you don't have to

Effectively, there are two ways: directly and indirectly.
The direct way is to return a value from the function, as you tried, and let the calling code use that value. This is normally what you want. The natural, simple, direct, explicit way to get information back from a function is to return it. Broadly speaking, the purpose of a function is to compute a value, and return signifies "this is the value we computed; we are done here".
Directly using return
The main trick here is that return returns a value, not a variable. So return x does not enable the calling code to use x after calling the function, and does not modify any existing value that x had in the context of the call. (That's presumably why you got a NameError.)
After we use return in the function:
def example():
x = 'hello world'
return x
we need to write the calling code to use the return value:
result = example()
print(result)
The other key point here is that a call to a function is an expression, so we can use it the same way that we use, say, the result of an addition. Just as we may say result = 'hello ' + 'world', we may say result = foo(). After that, result is our own, local name for that string, and we can do whatever we want with it.
We can use the same name, x, if we want. Or we can use a different name. The calling code doesn't have to know anything about how the function is written, or what names it uses for things.1
We can use the value directly to call another function: for example, print(foo()).2 We can return the value directly: simply return 'hello world', without assigning to x. (Again: we are returning a value, not a variable.)
The function can only return once each time it is called. return terminates the function - again, we just determined the result of the calculation, so there is no reason to calculate any further. If we want to return multiple pieces of information, therefore, we will need to come up with a single object (in Python, "value" and "object" are effectively synonyms; this doesn't work out so well for some other languages.)
We can make a tuple right on the return line; or we can use a dictionary, a namedtuple (Python 2.6+), a types.simpleNamespace (Python 3.3+), a dataclass (Python 3.7+), or some other class (perhaps even one we write ourselves) to associate names with the values that are being returned; or we can accumulate values from a loop in a list; etc. etc. The possibilities are endless..
On the other hand, the function returns whether you like it or not (unless an exception is raised). If it reaches the end, it will implicitly return the special value None. You may or may not want to do it explicitly instead.
Indirect methods
Other than returning the result back to the caller directly, we can communicate it by modifying some existing object that the caller knows about. There are many ways to do that, but they're all variations on that same theme.
If you want the code to communicate information back this way, please just let it return None - don't also use the return value for something meaningful. That's how the built-in functionality works.
In order to modify that object, the called function also has to know about it, of course. That means, having a name for the object that can be looked up in a current scope. So, let's go through those in order:
Local scope: Modifying a passed-in argument
If one of our parameters is mutable, we can just mutate it, and rely on the caller to examine the change. This is usually not a great idea, because it can be hard to reason about the code. It looks like:
def called(mutable):
mutable.append('world')
def caller():
my_value = ['hello'] # a list with just that string
called(my_value)
# now it contains both strings
If the value is an instance of our own class, we could also assign to an attribute:
class Test:
def __init__(self, value):
self.value = value
def called(mutable):
mutable.value = 'world'
def caller():
test = Test('hello')
called(test)
# now test.value has changed
Assigning to an attribute does not work for built-in types, including object; and it might not work for some classes that explicitly prevent you from doing it.
Local scope: Modifying self, in a method
We already have an example of this above: setting self.value in the Test.__init__ code. This is a special case of modifying a passed-in argument; but it's part of how classes work in Python, and something we're expected to do. Normally, when we do this, the calling won't actually check for changes to self - it will just use the modified object in the next step of the logic. That's what makes it appropriate to write code this way: we're still presenting an interface, so the caller doesn't have to worry about the details.
class Example:
def __init__(self):
self._words = ['hello']
def add_word(self):
self._words.append('world')
def display(self):
print(*self.words)
x = Example()
x.add_word()
x.display()
In the example, calling add_word gave information back to the top-level code - but instead of looking for it, we just go ahead and call display.3
See also: Passing variables between methods in Python?
Enclosing scope
This is a rare special case when using nested functions. There isn't a lot to say here - it works the same way as with the global scope, just using the nonlocal keyword rather than global.4
Global scope: Modifying a global
Generally speaking, it is a bad idea to change anything in the global scope after setting it up in the first place. It makes code harder to reason about, because anything that uses that global (aside from whatever was responsible for the change) now has a "hidden" source of input.
If you still want to do it, the syntax is straightforward:
words = ['hello']
def add_global_word():
words.append('world')
add_global_word() # `words` is changed
Global scope: Assigning to a new or existing global
This is actually a special case of modifying a global. I don't mean that assignment is a kind of modification (it isn't). I mean that when you assign a global name, Python automatically updates a dict that represents the global namespace. You can get that dict with globals(), and you can modify that dict and it will actually impact what global variables exist. (I.e., the return from globals() is the dictionary itself, not a copy.)5
But please don't. That's even worse of an idea than the previous one. If you really need to get the result from your function by assigning to a global variable, use the global keyword to tell Python that the name should be looked up in the global scope:
words = ['hello']
def replace_global_words():
global words
words = ['hello', 'world']
replace_global_words() # `words` is a new list with both words
Global scope: Assigning to or modifying an attribute of the function itself
This is a rare special case, but now that you've seen the other examples, the theory should be clear. In Python, functions are mutable (i.e. you can set attributes on them); and if we define a function at top level, it's in the global namespace. So this is really just modifying a global:
def set_own_words():
set_own_words.words = ['hello', 'world']
set_own_words()
print(*set_own_words.words)
We shouldn't really use this to send information to the caller. It has all the usual problems with globals, and it's even harder to understand. But it can be useful to set a function's attributes from within the function, in order for the function to remember something in between calls. (It's similar to how methods remember things in between calls by modifying self.) The functools standard library does this, for example in the cache implementation.
Builtin scope
This doesn't work. The builtin namespace doesn't contain any mutable objects, and you can't assign new builtin names (they'll go into the global namespace instead).
Some approaches that don't work in Python
Just calculating something before the function ends
In some other programming languages, there is some kind of hidden variable that automatically picks up the result of the last calculation, every time something is calculated; and if you reach the end of a function without returning anything, it gets returned. That doesn't work in Python. If you reach the end without returning anything, your function returns None.
Assigning to the function's name
In some other programming languages, you are allowed (or expected) to assign to a variable with the same name as the function; and at the end of the function, that value is returned. That still doesn't work in Python. If you reach the end without returning anything, your function still returns None.
def broken():
broken = 1
broken()
print(broken + 1) # causes a `TypeError`
It might seem like you can at least use the value that way, if you use the global keyword:
def subtly_broken():
global subtly_broken
subtly_broken = 1
subtly_broken()
print(subtly_broken + 1) # 2
But this, of course, is just a special case of assigning to a global. And there's a big problem with it - the same name can't refer to two things at once. By doing this, the function replaced its own name. So it will fail next time:
def subtly_broken():
global subtly_broken
subtly_broken = 1
subtly_broken()
subtly_broken() # causes a `TypeError`
Assigning to a parameter
Sometimes people expect to be able to assign to one of the function's parameters, and have it affect a variable that was used for the corresponding argument. However, this does not work:
def broken(words):
words = ['hello', 'world']
data = ['hello']
broken(data) # `data` does not change
Just like how Python returns values, not variables, it also passes values, not variables. words is a local name; by definition the calling code doesn't know anything about that namespace.
One of the working methods that we saw is to modify the passed-in list. That works because if the list itself changes, then it changes - it doesn't matter what name is used for it, or what part of the code uses that name. However, assigning a new list to words does not cause the existing list to change. It just makes words start being a name for a different list.
For more information, see How do I pass a variable by reference?.
1 At least, not for getting the value back. If you want to use keyword arguments, you need to know what the keyword names are. But generally, the point of functions is that they're an abstraction; you only need to know about their interface, and you don't need to think about what they're doing internally.
2 In 2.x, print is a statement rather than a function, so this doesn't make an example of calling another function directly. However, print foo() still works with 2.x's print statement, and so does print(foo()) (in this case, the extra parentheses are just ordinary grouping parentheses). Aside from that, 2.7 (the last 2.x version) has been unsupported since the beginning of 2020 - which was nearly a 5 year extension of the normal schedule. But then, this question was originally asked in 2010.
3Again: if the purpose of a method is to update the object, don't also return a value. Some people like to return self so that you can "chain" method calls; but in Python this is considered poor style. If you want that kind of "fluent" interface, then instead of writing methods that update self, write methods that create a new, modified instance of the class.
4 Except, of course, that if we're modifying a value rather than assigning, we don't need either keyword.
5 There's also a locals() that gives you a dict of local variables. However, this cannot be used to make new local variables - the behaviour is undefined in 2.x, and in 3.x the dict is created on the fly and assigning to it has no effect. Some of Python's optimizations depend on the local variables for a function being known ahead of time.

>>> def foo():
return 'hello world'
>>> x = foo()
>>> x
'hello world'

You can use global statement and then achieve what you want without returning value from
the function. For example you can do something like below:
def foo():
global x
x = "hello world"
foo()
print x
The above code will print "hello world".
But please be warned that usage of "global" is not a good idea at all and it is better to avoid usage that is shown in my example.
Also check this related discussion on about usage of global statement in Python.

python beginner craps: global name not defined - naming variables [duplicate]

Suppose I have a function like:
def foo():
x = 'hello world'
How do I get the function to return x, in such a way that I can use it as the input for another function or use the variable within the body of a program? I tried using return and then using the x variable in another function, but I get a NameError that way.
For the specific case of communicating information between methods in the same class, it is often best to store the information in self. See Passing variables between methods in Python? for details.

def foo():
x = 'hello world'
return x # return 'hello world' would do, too
foo()
print(x) # NameError - x is not defined outside the function
y = foo()
print(y) # this works
x = foo()
print(x) # this also works, and it's a completely different x than that inside
# foo()
z = bar(x) # of course, now you can use x as you want
z = bar(foo()) # but you don't have to

Effectively, there are two ways: directly and indirectly.
The direct way is to return a value from the function, as you tried, and let the calling code use that value. This is normally what you want. The natural, simple, direct, explicit way to get information back from a function is to return it. Broadly speaking, the purpose of a function is to compute a value, and return signifies "this is the value we computed; we are done here".
Directly using return
The main trick here is that return returns a value, not a variable. So return x does not enable the calling code to use x after calling the function, and does not modify any existing value that x had in the context of the call. (That's presumably why you got a NameError.)
After we use return in the function:
def example():
x = 'hello world'
return x
we need to write the calling code to use the return value:
result = example()
print(result)
The other key point here is that a call to a function is an expression, so we can use it the same way that we use, say, the result of an addition. Just as we may say result = 'hello ' + 'world', we may say result = foo(). After that, result is our own, local name for that string, and we can do whatever we want with it.
We can use the same name, x, if we want. Or we can use a different name. The calling code doesn't have to know anything about how the function is written, or what names it uses for things.1
We can use the value directly to call another function: for example, print(foo()).2 We can return the value directly: simply return 'hello world', without assigning to x. (Again: we are returning a value, not a variable.)
The function can only return once each time it is called. return terminates the function - again, we just determined the result of the calculation, so there is no reason to calculate any further. If we want to return multiple pieces of information, therefore, we will need to come up with a single object (in Python, "value" and "object" are effectively synonyms; this doesn't work out so well for some other languages.)
We can make a tuple right on the return line; or we can use a dictionary, a namedtuple (Python 2.6+), a types.simpleNamespace (Python 3.3+), a dataclass (Python 3.7+), or some other class (perhaps even one we write ourselves) to associate names with the values that are being returned; or we can accumulate values from a loop in a list; etc. etc. The possibilities are endless..
On the other hand, the function returns whether you like it or not (unless an exception is raised). If it reaches the end, it will implicitly return the special value None. You may or may not want to do it explicitly instead.
Indirect methods
Other than returning the result back to the caller directly, we can communicate it by modifying some existing object that the caller knows about. There are many ways to do that, but they're all variations on that same theme.
If you want the code to communicate information back this way, please just let it return None - don't also use the return value for something meaningful. That's how the built-in functionality works.
In order to modify that object, the called function also has to know about it, of course. That means, having a name for the object that can be looked up in a current scope. So, let's go through those in order:
Local scope: Modifying a passed-in argument
If one of our parameters is mutable, we can just mutate it, and rely on the caller to examine the change. This is usually not a great idea, because it can be hard to reason about the code. It looks like:
def called(mutable):
mutable.append('world')
def caller():
my_value = ['hello'] # a list with just that string
called(my_value)
# now it contains both strings
If the value is an instance of our own class, we could also assign to an attribute:
class Test:
def __init__(self, value):
self.value = value
def called(mutable):
mutable.value = 'world'
def caller():
test = Test('hello')
called(test)
# now test.value has changed
Assigning to an attribute does not work for built-in types, including object; and it might not work for some classes that explicitly prevent you from doing it.
Local scope: Modifying self, in a method
We already have an example of this above: setting self.value in the Test.__init__ code. This is a special case of modifying a passed-in argument; but it's part of how classes work in Python, and something we're expected to do. Normally, when we do this, the calling won't actually check for changes to self - it will just use the modified object in the next step of the logic. That's what makes it appropriate to write code this way: we're still presenting an interface, so the caller doesn't have to worry about the details.
class Example:
def __init__(self):
self._words = ['hello']
def add_word(self):
self._words.append('world')
def display(self):
print(*self.words)
x = Example()
x.add_word()
x.display()
In the example, calling add_word gave information back to the top-level code - but instead of looking for it, we just go ahead and call display.3
See also: Passing variables between methods in Python?
Enclosing scope
This is a rare special case when using nested functions. There isn't a lot to say here - it works the same way as with the global scope, just using the nonlocal keyword rather than global.4
Global scope: Modifying a global
Generally speaking, it is a bad idea to change anything in the global scope after setting it up in the first place. It makes code harder to reason about, because anything that uses that global (aside from whatever was responsible for the change) now has a "hidden" source of input.
If you still want to do it, the syntax is straightforward:
words = ['hello']
def add_global_word():
words.append('world')
add_global_word() # `words` is changed
Global scope: Assigning to a new or existing global
This is actually a special case of modifying a global. I don't mean that assignment is a kind of modification (it isn't). I mean that when you assign a global name, Python automatically updates a dict that represents the global namespace. You can get that dict with globals(), and you can modify that dict and it will actually impact what global variables exist. (I.e., the return from globals() is the dictionary itself, not a copy.)5
But please don't. That's even worse of an idea than the previous one. If you really need to get the result from your function by assigning to a global variable, use the global keyword to tell Python that the name should be looked up in the global scope:
words = ['hello']
def replace_global_words():
global words
words = ['hello', 'world']
replace_global_words() # `words` is a new list with both words
Global scope: Assigning to or modifying an attribute of the function itself
This is a rare special case, but now that you've seen the other examples, the theory should be clear. In Python, functions are mutable (i.e. you can set attributes on them); and if we define a function at top level, it's in the global namespace. So this is really just modifying a global:
def set_own_words():
set_own_words.words = ['hello', 'world']
set_own_words()
print(*set_own_words.words)
We shouldn't really use this to send information to the caller. It has all the usual problems with globals, and it's even harder to understand. But it can be useful to set a function's attributes from within the function, in order for the function to remember something in between calls. (It's similar to how methods remember things in between calls by modifying self.) The functools standard library does this, for example in the cache implementation.
Builtin scope
This doesn't work. The builtin namespace doesn't contain any mutable objects, and you can't assign new builtin names (they'll go into the global namespace instead).
Some approaches that don't work in Python
Just calculating something before the function ends
In some other programming languages, there is some kind of hidden variable that automatically picks up the result of the last calculation, every time something is calculated; and if you reach the end of a function without returning anything, it gets returned. That doesn't work in Python. If you reach the end without returning anything, your function returns None.
Assigning to the function's name
In some other programming languages, you are allowed (or expected) to assign to a variable with the same name as the function; and at the end of the function, that value is returned. That still doesn't work in Python. If you reach the end without returning anything, your function still returns None.
def broken():
broken = 1
broken()
print(broken + 1) # causes a `TypeError`
It might seem like you can at least use the value that way, if you use the global keyword:
def subtly_broken():
global subtly_broken
subtly_broken = 1
subtly_broken()
print(subtly_broken + 1) # 2
But this, of course, is just a special case of assigning to a global. And there's a big problem with it - the same name can't refer to two things at once. By doing this, the function replaced its own name. So it will fail next time:
def subtly_broken():
global subtly_broken
subtly_broken = 1
subtly_broken()
subtly_broken() # causes a `TypeError`
Assigning to a parameter
Sometimes people expect to be able to assign to one of the function's parameters, and have it affect a variable that was used for the corresponding argument. However, this does not work:
def broken(words):
words = ['hello', 'world']
data = ['hello']
broken(data) # `data` does not change
Just like how Python returns values, not variables, it also passes values, not variables. words is a local name; by definition the calling code doesn't know anything about that namespace.
One of the working methods that we saw is to modify the passed-in list. That works because if the list itself changes, then it changes - it doesn't matter what name is used for it, or what part of the code uses that name. However, assigning a new list to words does not cause the existing list to change. It just makes words start being a name for a different list.
For more information, see How do I pass a variable by reference?.
1 At least, not for getting the value back. If you want to use keyword arguments, you need to know what the keyword names are. But generally, the point of functions is that they're an abstraction; you only need to know about their interface, and you don't need to think about what they're doing internally.
2 In 2.x, print is a statement rather than a function, so this doesn't make an example of calling another function directly. However, print foo() still works with 2.x's print statement, and so does print(foo()) (in this case, the extra parentheses are just ordinary grouping parentheses). Aside from that, 2.7 (the last 2.x version) has been unsupported since the beginning of 2020 - which was nearly a 5 year extension of the normal schedule. But then, this question was originally asked in 2010.
3Again: if the purpose of a method is to update the object, don't also return a value. Some people like to return self so that you can "chain" method calls; but in Python this is considered poor style. If you want that kind of "fluent" interface, then instead of writing methods that update self, write methods that create a new, modified instance of the class.
4 Except, of course, that if we're modifying a value rather than assigning, we don't need either keyword.
5 There's also a locals() that gives you a dict of local variables. However, this cannot be used to make new local variables - the behaviour is undefined in 2.x, and in 3.x the dict is created on the fly and assigning to it has no effect. Some of Python's optimizations depend on the local variables for a function being known ahead of time.

>>> def foo():
return 'hello world'
>>> x = foo()
>>> x
'hello world'

You can use global statement and then achieve what you want without returning value from
the function. For example you can do something like below:
def foo():
global x
x = "hello world"
foo()
print x
The above code will print "hello world".
But please be warned that usage of "global" is not a good idea at all and it is better to avoid usage that is shown in my example.
Also check this related discussion on about usage of global statement in Python.

Where is nonlocals()?

How do I obtain the non-local variables for the current scope? The functions vars, locals, and globals exist, but is there a function to get the nonlocals?
Why aren't the nonlocals listed when calling vars?
Update
My issue is that there's no way to enumerate the variables available in the current scope, as neither vars or globals includes the non-locals AFAICT.
I frequently use vars in code such as the following:
'{meh[0]}/{meh[3]} {a}{b}{c}'.format(**vars())
Which fails if any of these variables are in the scope of a containing function.

From within running code, you can easily get the names of the nonlocal variables - but retriving their content in a way a call to locals gets you a dictionary is a bit trickier.
The used nonlocal variable names are stored in the current running code object, in the co_freevars attribute.
So, getting the nonlocal names is a matter of:
names = inspect.currentframe().f_code.co_freevars
The contents for these variables, however, are stored in the __closure__ attribute (func_closure, in Python 2), of the function object instead. (Not the code object). The problem is that, without "aid from outside", there is no easy way for a running code to get to the function object it is running on. You can get to the frame object, which links to the code object, but there are no links back to the function object. (For a top level defined function one could explicitly use the function known name, as used in the def statement` but for an enclosed function, that is returned to a caller, there is no way of knowing its name either).
So, one has to resort to a trick - getting all the objects that link to the current code object, by using the gc module (garbage collector) - there is a gc.get_referrers call - it will return all the function objects that link to the code object one holds.
So, inside a function with non_local variables one could do:
import inspect, gc
from types import FunctionType
def a(b):
b1 = 2
def c():
nonlocal b1
print (b)
code = inspect.currentframe().f_code
names = code.co_freevars
function = [func for func in gc.get_referrers(code) if isinstance(func, FunctionType)][0]
nonlocals = dict (zip(names, (x.cell_contents for x in function.__closure__ )))
print(nonlocals)
return inspect.currentframe()
return c
c = a(5)
f = c()
And therefore retrieve the names and values of the nonlocals. But this won't work if you have more than one instance of that function around (that is, if the function of interested was created more than once with more than one call to the functin that generates it) - becasue all of those instances will link to the same code object. The example above, assumes there is only one function running with the current code - and would work correctly in this case. Another call to the factrory function would create another function, with potentially other values for the nonlocal variables, but with the same code object - the function = list genrator above would retrieve all of those, and arbitrarily pick the first of those.
The "correct" function is the one on which the current code is executing - I am trying to think of a way of retrieving this information, but can't get to it. If I can, I will complete this answer, but for now, this can't help you to retrieve the nonlocals values values.
(just found out that trying to use "eval" with a nonlocal variable name won't work as well)
It looks like that the only thing linking the current running frame to the function object where the nonlocal variables values are held is created at run time inside the native side of the Python interpreter. I can't think of a way of getting to it short of using the ctypes module to look at interpreters data structures at runtime, which would, of course, be unsuitable for any actual production code.
The bottom line: you can reliably retrieve the nonlocal variable names. But it looks like you can't get their value given their name as a string (nor rebind then).
You could try opening a feature-request for a "nonlocals" call on Python's bug tracker or on Python-ideas mailing list.

How to maintain lists and dictionaries between function calls in Python?

I have a function. Inside that I'm maintainfing a dictionary of values.
I want that dictionary to be maintained between different function calls
Suppose the dic is :
a = {'a':1,'b':2,'c':3}
At first call,say,I changed a[a] to 100
Dict becomes a = {'a':100,'b':2,'c':3}
At another call,i changed a[b] to 200
I want that dic to be a = {'a':100,'b':200,'c':3}
But in my code a[a] doesn't remain 100.It changes to initial value 1.
I need an answer ASAP....I m already late...Please help me friends...

You might be talking about a callable object.
class MyFunction( object ):
def __init__( self ):
self.rememberThis= dict()
def __call__( self, arg1, arg2 ):
# do something
rememberThis['a'] = arg1
return someValue
myFunction= MyFunction()
From then on, use myFunction as a simple function. You can access the rememberThis dictionary using myFunction.rememberThis.

You could use a static variable:
def foo(k, v):
foo.a[k] = v
foo.a = {'a': 1, 'b': 2, 'c': 3}
foo('a', 100)
foo('b', 200)
print foo.a

Rather than forcing globals on the code base (that can be the decision of the caller) I prefer the idea of keeping the state related to an instance of the function. A class is good for this but doesn't communicate well what you are trying to accomplish and can be a bit verbose. Taking advantage of closures is, in my opinion, a lot cleaner.
def function_the_world_sees():
a = {'a':1,'b':2,'c':3}
def actual_function(arg0, arg1):
a[arg0] = arg1
return a
return actual_function
stateful_function = function_the_world_sees()
stateful_function("b", 100)
stateful_function("b", 200)
The main caution to keep in mind is that when you make assignments in "actual_function", they occur within "actual_function". This means you can't reassign a to a different variable. The work arounds I use are to put all of my variables I plan to reassign into either into a single element list per variable or a dictionary.

If 'a' is being created inside the function. It is going out of scope. Simply create it outside the function(and before the function is called). By doing this the list/hash will not be deleted after the program leaves the function.
a = {'a':1,'b':2,'c':3}
# call you funciton here

This question doesn't have an elegant answer, in my opinion. The options are callable objects, default values, and attribute hacks. Callable objects are the right answer, but they bring in a lot of structure for what would be a single "static" declaration in another language. Default values are a minor change to the code, but it's kludgy and can be confusing to a new python programmer looking at your code. I don't like them because their existence isn't hidden from anyone who might be looking at your API.
I generally go with an attribute hack. My preferred method is:
def myfunct():
if not hasattr(myfunct, 'state'): myfunct.state = list()
# access myfunct.state in the body however you want
This keeps the declaration of the state in the first line of the function where it belongs, as well as keeping myfunct as a function. The downside is you do the attribute check every time you call the function. This is almost certainly not going to be a bottleneck in most code.

You can 'cheat' using Python's behavior for default arguments. Default arguments are only evaluated once; they get reused for every call of the function.
>>> def testFunction(persistent_dict={'a': 0}):
... persistent_dict['a'] += 1
... print persistent_dict['a']
...
>>> testFunction()
1
>>> testFunction()
2
This isn't the most elegant solution; if someone calls the function and passes in a parameter it will override the default, which probably isn't what you want.
If you just want a quick and dirty way to get the results, that will work. If you're doing something more complicated it might be better to factor it out into a class like S. Lott mentioned.
EDIT: Renamed the dictionary so it wouldn't hide the builtin dict as per the comment below.

Personally, I like the idea of the global statement. It doesn't introduce a global variable but states that a local identifier actually refers to one in the global namespace.
d = dict()
l = list()
def foo(bar, baz):
global d
global l
l.append(bar, baz)
d[bar] = baz
In python 3.0 there is also a "nonlocal" statement.