I wrote a test program that looked like this:
#!/usr/bin/python
def incrementc():
c = c + 1
def main():
c = 5
incrementc()
main()
print c
I'd think that since I called incrementc within the body of main, all variables from main would pass to incrementc. But when I run this program I get
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "test.py", line 10, in <module>
main()
File "test.py", line 8, in main
incrementc()
File "test.py", line 4, in incrementc
c = c + 1
UnboundLocalError: local variable 'c' referenced before assignment
Why isn't c passing through? And if I want a variable to be referenced by multiple functions, do I have to declare it globally? I read somewhere that global variables are bad.
Thanks!
You're thinking of dynamic scoping. The problem with dynamic scoping is that the behavior of incrementc would depend on previous function calls, which makes it very difficult to reason about the code. Instead most programming languages (also Python) use static scoping: c is visible only within main.
To accomplish what you want, you'd either use a global variable, or, better, pass c as a parameter. Now, because the primitives in Python are immutable, passing an integer can't be changed (it's effectively passed by value), so you'd have to pack it into a container, like a list. Like this:
def increment(l):
l[0] = l[0] + 1
def main():
c = [5]
increment(c)
print c[0]
main()
Or, even simpler:
def increment(l):
return l + 1
def main():
c = 5
print increment(c)
main()
Generally, global variables are bad because they make it very easy to write code that's hard to understand. If you only have these two functions, you can go ahead and make c global because it's still obvious what the code does. If you have more code, it's better to pass the variables as a parameter instead; this way you can more easily see who depends on the global variable.
When a variable is assigned to in a scope, Python assumes it's local for the whole scope unless you tell it otherwise.
So, to get this to work as you think it will, you need to use two global statements:
#!/usr/bin/python
def incrementc():
global c
c = c + 1
def main():
global c
c = 5
incrementc()
main()
print c
Otherwise, you're talking about a local variable named c in both situations.
The normal way to solve this, however, does not involve globals.
#!/usr/bin/python
def incrementc(c):
c = c + 1
return c
def main():
c = 5
c = incrementc(c)
return c
c = main()
print c
Here, in each function and in the global scope, c refers to a different variable, which you are passing around as an argument and with return values. If you wanted only one c, use a class:
class Foo:
def __init__(self, c):
self.c = c
self.incrementc()
def incrementc(self):
self.c = self.c + 1
foo = Foo(5)
print foo.c
The variable c isn't passing through because you do not hand any reference to c to the function incrementc.
What you're looking at here are 3 scopes, the global scope and those within the functions main and incrementc. In main you've properly defined a variable c, but increment c has no knowledge of this - so attempting to increment it is going to fail. Even if those two functions succeeded, trying to print c would fail in the global scope because it has no knowledge of the c you've defined in main.
You have a few options. One way to do this:
def incrementc(c):
c = c + 1
return c
def main():
c = 5
c = incrementc(c)
return c
c = main()
print c
Notice how c is being handed around. Of course, the name doesn't have to be preserved, you very well could write it like this:
def increment(z):
z = z + 1
return z
def main():
bar = 5
bar = increment(bar)
return bar
foo = main()
print foo
Another option that many would probably dislike (for good reason) is to use globals. In that case:
def incrementc():
global c # indicate intention to write to this global, not just read it
c = c + 1
def main():
global c # declares c in global space
c = 5
incrementc()
main()
print c
Any function in which you hope to MODIFY the GLOBAL instance of c, you need to inform the function. So you state, 'global c'. You can READ from the global without doing so. This would ensure (to some extent) that you don't make a mistake and overwrite a value in the global space unintentionally with a similar name, should you decide to use one in the local space of a function.
Hopefully that's clear enough, but feel free to ask for clarification on any point (I'm also open to being corrected if I've mistakenly described any part of this).
Global variables are bad.
Just like friends and enemys. Keep your friends close but keep your enemys even closer.
The function main last a local variable c, assignment the value 5
You then call the function inc..C. The c from main is now out of scope so you are trying to use a value of c that is not in scope - hence the error.
Related
Consider this example:
def A():
b = 1
def B():
# I can access 'b' from here.
print(b)
# But can i modify 'b' here?
B()
A()
For the code in the B function, the variable b is in a non-global, enclosing (outer) scope. How can I modify b from within B? I get an UnboundLocalError if I try it directly, and using global does not fix the problem since b is not global.
Python implements lexical, not dynamic scope - like almost all modern languages. The techniques here will not allow access to the caller's variables - unless the caller also happens to be an enclosing function - because the caller is not in scope. For more on this problem, see How can I access variables from the caller, even if it isn't an enclosing scope (i.e., implement dynamic scoping)?.
On Python 3, use the nonlocal keyword:
The nonlocal statement causes the listed identifiers to refer to previously bound variables in the nearest enclosing scope excluding globals. This is important because the default behavior for binding is to search the local namespace first. The statement allows encapsulated code to rebind variables outside of the local scope besides the global (module) scope.
def foo():
a = 1
def bar():
nonlocal a
a = 2
bar()
print(a) # Output: 2
On Python 2, use a mutable object (like a list, or dict) and mutate the value instead of reassigning a variable:
def foo():
a = []
def bar():
a.append(1)
bar()
bar()
print a
foo()
Outputs:
[1, 1]
You can use an empty class to hold a temporary scope. It's like the mutable but a bit prettier.
def outer_fn():
class FnScope:
b = 5
c = 6
def inner_fn():
FnScope.b += 1
FnScope.c += FnScope.b
inner_fn()
inner_fn()
inner_fn()
This yields the following interactive output:
>>> outer_fn()
8 27
>>> fs = FnScope()
NameError: name 'FnScope' is not defined
I'm a little new to Python, but I've read a bit about this. I believe the best you're going to get is similar to the Java work-around, which is to wrap your outer variable in a list.
def A():
b = [1]
def B():
b[0] = 2
B()
print(b[0])
# The output is '2'
Edit: I guess this was probably true before Python 3. Looks like nonlocal is your answer.
No you cannot, at least in this way.
Because the "set operation" will create a new name in the current scope, which covers the outer one.
I don't know if there is an attribute of a function that gives the __dict__ of the outer space of the function when this outer space isn't the global space == the module, which is the case when the function is a nested function, in Python 3.
But in Python 2, as far as I know, there isn't such an attribute.
So the only possibilities to do what you want is:
1) using a mutable object, as said by others
2)
def A() :
b = 1
print 'b before B() ==', b
def B() :
b = 10
print 'b ==', b
return b
b = B()
print 'b after B() ==', b
A()
result
b before B() == 1
b == 10
b after B() == 10
.
Nota
The solution of Cédric Julien has a drawback:
def A() :
global b # N1
b = 1
print ' b in function B before executing C() :', b
def B() :
global b # N2
print ' b in function B before assigning b = 2 :', b
b = 2
print ' b in function B after assigning b = 2 :', b
B()
print ' b in function A , after execution of B()', b
b = 450
print 'global b , before execution of A() :', b
A()
print 'global b , after execution of A() :', b
result
global b , before execution of A() : 450
b in function B before executing B() : 1
b in function B before assigning b = 2 : 1
b in function B after assigning b = 2 : 2
b in function A , after execution of B() 2
global b , after execution of A() : 2
The global b after execution of A() has been modified and it may be not whished so
That's the case only if there is an object with identifier b in the global namespace
The short answer that will just work automagically
I created a python library for solving this specific problem. It is released under the unlisence so use it however you wish. You can install it with pip install seapie or check out the home page here https://github.com/hirsimaki-markus/SEAPIE
user#pc:home$ pip install seapie
from seapie import Seapie as seapie
def A():
b = 1
def B():
seapie(1, "b=2")
print(b)
B()
A()
outputs
2
the arguments have following meaning:
The first argument is execution scope. 0 would mean local B(), 1 means parent A() and 2 would mean grandparent <module> aka global
The second argument is a string or code object you want to execute in the given scope
You can also call it without arguments for interactive shell inside your program
The long answer
This is more complicated. Seapie works by editing the frames in call stack using CPython api. CPython is the de facto standard so most people don't have to worry about it.
The magic words you are probably most likely interesed in if you are reading this are the following:
frame = sys._getframe(1) # 1 stands for previous frame
parent_locals = frame.f_locals # true dictionary of parent locals
parent_globals = frame.f_globals # true dictionary of parent globals
exec(codeblock, parent_globals, parent_locals)
ctypes.pythonapi.PyFrame_LocalsToFast(ctypes.py_object(frame),ctypes.c_int(1))
# the magic value 1 stands for ability to introduce new variables. 0 for update-only
The latter will force updates to pass into local scope. local scopes are however optimized differently than global scope so intoducing new objects has some problems when you try to call them directly if they are not initialized in any way. I will copy few ways to circumvent these problems from the github page
Assingn, import and define your objects beforehand
Assingn placeholder to your objects beforehand
Reassign object to itself in main program to update symbol table: x = locals()["x"]
Use exec() in main program instead of directly calling to avoid optimization. Instead of calling x do: exec("x")
If you are feeling that using exec() is not something you want to go with you can
emulate the behaviour by updating the the true local dictionary (not the one returned by locals()). I will copy an example from https://faster-cpython.readthedocs.io/mutable.html
import sys
import ctypes
def hack():
# Get the frame object of the caller
frame = sys._getframe(1)
frame.f_locals['x'] = "hack!"
# Force an update of locals array from locals dict
ctypes.pythonapi.PyFrame_LocalsToFast(ctypes.py_object(frame),
ctypes.c_int(0))
def func():
x = 1
hack()
print(x)
func()
Output:
hack!
I don't think you should want to do this. Functions that can alter things in their enclosing context are dangerous, as that context may be written without the knowledge of the function.
You could make it explicit, either by making B a public method and C a private method in a class (the best way probably); or by using a mutable type such as a list and passing it explicitly to C:
def A():
x = [0]
def B(var):
var[0] = 1
B(x)
print x
A()
For anyone looking at this much later on a safer but heavier workaround is. Without a need to pass variables as parameters.
def outer():
a = [1]
def inner(a=a):
a[0] += 1
inner()
return a[0]
You can, but you'll have to use the global statment (not a really good solution as always when using global variables, but it works):
def A():
global b
b = 1
def B():
global b
print( b )
b = 2
B()
A()
Consider this example:
def A():
b = 1
def B():
# I can access 'b' from here.
print(b)
# But can i modify 'b' here?
B()
A()
For the code in the B function, the variable b is in a non-global, enclosing (outer) scope. How can I modify b from within B? I get an UnboundLocalError if I try it directly, and using global does not fix the problem since b is not global.
Python implements lexical, not dynamic scope - like almost all modern languages. The techniques here will not allow access to the caller's variables - unless the caller also happens to be an enclosing function - because the caller is not in scope. For more on this problem, see How can I access variables from the caller, even if it isn't an enclosing scope (i.e., implement dynamic scoping)?.
On Python 3, use the nonlocal keyword:
The nonlocal statement causes the listed identifiers to refer to previously bound variables in the nearest enclosing scope excluding globals. This is important because the default behavior for binding is to search the local namespace first. The statement allows encapsulated code to rebind variables outside of the local scope besides the global (module) scope.
def foo():
a = 1
def bar():
nonlocal a
a = 2
bar()
print(a) # Output: 2
On Python 2, use a mutable object (like a list, or dict) and mutate the value instead of reassigning a variable:
def foo():
a = []
def bar():
a.append(1)
bar()
bar()
print a
foo()
Outputs:
[1, 1]
You can use an empty class to hold a temporary scope. It's like the mutable but a bit prettier.
def outer_fn():
class FnScope:
b = 5
c = 6
def inner_fn():
FnScope.b += 1
FnScope.c += FnScope.b
inner_fn()
inner_fn()
inner_fn()
This yields the following interactive output:
>>> outer_fn()
8 27
>>> fs = FnScope()
NameError: name 'FnScope' is not defined
I'm a little new to Python, but I've read a bit about this. I believe the best you're going to get is similar to the Java work-around, which is to wrap your outer variable in a list.
def A():
b = [1]
def B():
b[0] = 2
B()
print(b[0])
# The output is '2'
Edit: I guess this was probably true before Python 3. Looks like nonlocal is your answer.
No you cannot, at least in this way.
Because the "set operation" will create a new name in the current scope, which covers the outer one.
I don't know if there is an attribute of a function that gives the __dict__ of the outer space of the function when this outer space isn't the global space == the module, which is the case when the function is a nested function, in Python 3.
But in Python 2, as far as I know, there isn't such an attribute.
So the only possibilities to do what you want is:
1) using a mutable object, as said by others
2)
def A() :
b = 1
print 'b before B() ==', b
def B() :
b = 10
print 'b ==', b
return b
b = B()
print 'b after B() ==', b
A()
result
b before B() == 1
b == 10
b after B() == 10
.
Nota
The solution of Cédric Julien has a drawback:
def A() :
global b # N1
b = 1
print ' b in function B before executing C() :', b
def B() :
global b # N2
print ' b in function B before assigning b = 2 :', b
b = 2
print ' b in function B after assigning b = 2 :', b
B()
print ' b in function A , after execution of B()', b
b = 450
print 'global b , before execution of A() :', b
A()
print 'global b , after execution of A() :', b
result
global b , before execution of A() : 450
b in function B before executing B() : 1
b in function B before assigning b = 2 : 1
b in function B after assigning b = 2 : 2
b in function A , after execution of B() 2
global b , after execution of A() : 2
The global b after execution of A() has been modified and it may be not whished so
That's the case only if there is an object with identifier b in the global namespace
The short answer that will just work automagically
I created a python library for solving this specific problem. It is released under the unlisence so use it however you wish. You can install it with pip install seapie or check out the home page here https://github.com/hirsimaki-markus/SEAPIE
user#pc:home$ pip install seapie
from seapie import Seapie as seapie
def A():
b = 1
def B():
seapie(1, "b=2")
print(b)
B()
A()
outputs
2
the arguments have following meaning:
The first argument is execution scope. 0 would mean local B(), 1 means parent A() and 2 would mean grandparent <module> aka global
The second argument is a string or code object you want to execute in the given scope
You can also call it without arguments for interactive shell inside your program
The long answer
This is more complicated. Seapie works by editing the frames in call stack using CPython api. CPython is the de facto standard so most people don't have to worry about it.
The magic words you are probably most likely interesed in if you are reading this are the following:
frame = sys._getframe(1) # 1 stands for previous frame
parent_locals = frame.f_locals # true dictionary of parent locals
parent_globals = frame.f_globals # true dictionary of parent globals
exec(codeblock, parent_globals, parent_locals)
ctypes.pythonapi.PyFrame_LocalsToFast(ctypes.py_object(frame),ctypes.c_int(1))
# the magic value 1 stands for ability to introduce new variables. 0 for update-only
The latter will force updates to pass into local scope. local scopes are however optimized differently than global scope so intoducing new objects has some problems when you try to call them directly if they are not initialized in any way. I will copy few ways to circumvent these problems from the github page
Assingn, import and define your objects beforehand
Assingn placeholder to your objects beforehand
Reassign object to itself in main program to update symbol table: x = locals()["x"]
Use exec() in main program instead of directly calling to avoid optimization. Instead of calling x do: exec("x")
If you are feeling that using exec() is not something you want to go with you can
emulate the behaviour by updating the the true local dictionary (not the one returned by locals()). I will copy an example from https://faster-cpython.readthedocs.io/mutable.html
import sys
import ctypes
def hack():
# Get the frame object of the caller
frame = sys._getframe(1)
frame.f_locals['x'] = "hack!"
# Force an update of locals array from locals dict
ctypes.pythonapi.PyFrame_LocalsToFast(ctypes.py_object(frame),
ctypes.c_int(0))
def func():
x = 1
hack()
print(x)
func()
Output:
hack!
I don't think you should want to do this. Functions that can alter things in their enclosing context are dangerous, as that context may be written without the knowledge of the function.
You could make it explicit, either by making B a public method and C a private method in a class (the best way probably); or by using a mutable type such as a list and passing it explicitly to C:
def A():
x = [0]
def B(var):
var[0] = 1
B(x)
print x
A()
For anyone looking at this much later on a safer but heavier workaround is. Without a need to pass variables as parameters.
def outer():
a = [1]
def inner(a=a):
a[0] += 1
inner()
return a[0]
You can, but you'll have to use the global statment (not a really good solution as always when using global variables, but it works):
def A():
global b
b = 1
def B():
global b
print( b )
b = 2
B()
A()
Consider this example:
def A():
b = 1
def B():
# I can access 'b' from here.
print(b)
# But can i modify 'b' here?
B()
A()
For the code in the B function, the variable b is in a non-global, enclosing (outer) scope. How can I modify b from within B? I get an UnboundLocalError if I try it directly, and using global does not fix the problem since b is not global.
Python implements lexical, not dynamic scope - like almost all modern languages. The techniques here will not allow access to the caller's variables - unless the caller also happens to be an enclosing function - because the caller is not in scope. For more on this problem, see How can I access variables from the caller, even if it isn't an enclosing scope (i.e., implement dynamic scoping)?.
On Python 3, use the nonlocal keyword:
The nonlocal statement causes the listed identifiers to refer to previously bound variables in the nearest enclosing scope excluding globals. This is important because the default behavior for binding is to search the local namespace first. The statement allows encapsulated code to rebind variables outside of the local scope besides the global (module) scope.
def foo():
a = 1
def bar():
nonlocal a
a = 2
bar()
print(a) # Output: 2
On Python 2, use a mutable object (like a list, or dict) and mutate the value instead of reassigning a variable:
def foo():
a = []
def bar():
a.append(1)
bar()
bar()
print a
foo()
Outputs:
[1, 1]
You can use an empty class to hold a temporary scope. It's like the mutable but a bit prettier.
def outer_fn():
class FnScope:
b = 5
c = 6
def inner_fn():
FnScope.b += 1
FnScope.c += FnScope.b
inner_fn()
inner_fn()
inner_fn()
This yields the following interactive output:
>>> outer_fn()
8 27
>>> fs = FnScope()
NameError: name 'FnScope' is not defined
I'm a little new to Python, but I've read a bit about this. I believe the best you're going to get is similar to the Java work-around, which is to wrap your outer variable in a list.
def A():
b = [1]
def B():
b[0] = 2
B()
print(b[0])
# The output is '2'
Edit: I guess this was probably true before Python 3. Looks like nonlocal is your answer.
No you cannot, at least in this way.
Because the "set operation" will create a new name in the current scope, which covers the outer one.
I don't know if there is an attribute of a function that gives the __dict__ of the outer space of the function when this outer space isn't the global space == the module, which is the case when the function is a nested function, in Python 3.
But in Python 2, as far as I know, there isn't such an attribute.
So the only possibilities to do what you want is:
1) using a mutable object, as said by others
2)
def A() :
b = 1
print 'b before B() ==', b
def B() :
b = 10
print 'b ==', b
return b
b = B()
print 'b after B() ==', b
A()
result
b before B() == 1
b == 10
b after B() == 10
.
Nota
The solution of Cédric Julien has a drawback:
def A() :
global b # N1
b = 1
print ' b in function B before executing C() :', b
def B() :
global b # N2
print ' b in function B before assigning b = 2 :', b
b = 2
print ' b in function B after assigning b = 2 :', b
B()
print ' b in function A , after execution of B()', b
b = 450
print 'global b , before execution of A() :', b
A()
print 'global b , after execution of A() :', b
result
global b , before execution of A() : 450
b in function B before executing B() : 1
b in function B before assigning b = 2 : 1
b in function B after assigning b = 2 : 2
b in function A , after execution of B() 2
global b , after execution of A() : 2
The global b after execution of A() has been modified and it may be not whished so
That's the case only if there is an object with identifier b in the global namespace
The short answer that will just work automagically
I created a python library for solving this specific problem. It is released under the unlisence so use it however you wish. You can install it with pip install seapie or check out the home page here https://github.com/hirsimaki-markus/SEAPIE
user#pc:home$ pip install seapie
from seapie import Seapie as seapie
def A():
b = 1
def B():
seapie(1, "b=2")
print(b)
B()
A()
outputs
2
the arguments have following meaning:
The first argument is execution scope. 0 would mean local B(), 1 means parent A() and 2 would mean grandparent <module> aka global
The second argument is a string or code object you want to execute in the given scope
You can also call it without arguments for interactive shell inside your program
The long answer
This is more complicated. Seapie works by editing the frames in call stack using CPython api. CPython is the de facto standard so most people don't have to worry about it.
The magic words you are probably most likely interesed in if you are reading this are the following:
frame = sys._getframe(1) # 1 stands for previous frame
parent_locals = frame.f_locals # true dictionary of parent locals
parent_globals = frame.f_globals # true dictionary of parent globals
exec(codeblock, parent_globals, parent_locals)
ctypes.pythonapi.PyFrame_LocalsToFast(ctypes.py_object(frame),ctypes.c_int(1))
# the magic value 1 stands for ability to introduce new variables. 0 for update-only
The latter will force updates to pass into local scope. local scopes are however optimized differently than global scope so intoducing new objects has some problems when you try to call them directly if they are not initialized in any way. I will copy few ways to circumvent these problems from the github page
Assingn, import and define your objects beforehand
Assingn placeholder to your objects beforehand
Reassign object to itself in main program to update symbol table: x = locals()["x"]
Use exec() in main program instead of directly calling to avoid optimization. Instead of calling x do: exec("x")
If you are feeling that using exec() is not something you want to go with you can
emulate the behaviour by updating the the true local dictionary (not the one returned by locals()). I will copy an example from https://faster-cpython.readthedocs.io/mutable.html
import sys
import ctypes
def hack():
# Get the frame object of the caller
frame = sys._getframe(1)
frame.f_locals['x'] = "hack!"
# Force an update of locals array from locals dict
ctypes.pythonapi.PyFrame_LocalsToFast(ctypes.py_object(frame),
ctypes.c_int(0))
def func():
x = 1
hack()
print(x)
func()
Output:
hack!
I don't think you should want to do this. Functions that can alter things in their enclosing context are dangerous, as that context may be written without the knowledge of the function.
You could make it explicit, either by making B a public method and C a private method in a class (the best way probably); or by using a mutable type such as a list and passing it explicitly to C:
def A():
x = [0]
def B(var):
var[0] = 1
B(x)
print x
A()
For anyone looking at this much later on a safer but heavier workaround is. Without a need to pass variables as parameters.
def outer():
a = [1]
def inner(a=a):
a[0] += 1
inner()
return a[0]
You can, but you'll have to use the global statment (not a really good solution as always when using global variables, but it works):
def A():
global b
b = 1
def B():
global b
print( b )
b = 2
B()
A()
I want to call var d from b(). but I get this error. I have heard that you can have global variables which I tried but with no success.
Error:
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "C:/Users/user2/Desktop/def.py", line 9, in <module>
a()
File "C:/Users/user2/Desktop/def.py", line 3, in a
if d == 0:
NameError: name 'd' is not defined
Code:
def a():
if d == 0:
print(correct)
else:
print (not correct)
def b():
d = 0
a()
You can define the variable outside the function and it should work. Although it is better to pass as argument.
d=0
correct="It is correct"
notcorrect="It is not correct"
def a():
if d == 0:
print(correct)
else:
print(notcorrect)
a()
You can use variables of a "parent" scope, even if it's better to pass them to the method. Your function b() is never called in your example. And definitions in a function are just defined for this functions or functions called from there.
I would recommend you to read about scopes:
https://pythonspot.com/scope/ (there are tons of other tutorials out there, just use your search engine ;))
what you could do:
d = 0
a() # correct
what you could do as well:
def b():
d = 0
a()
b() # correct
but what you SHOULD do is probably something like:
def b():
d = 0
return d
def a(d):
...
a(b()) # correct
global variables exist in python, but especially for beginners it often seems to be an easy solution, but as soon as your code grows this can become very complex if not used carefully.. understanding scopes of variables and how to pass them into other functions is the way to go.
The code will definitely show an error because the variables created within the function are for that function only called local variables, and the variable created outside the function are called global variables.
hence,
you simply have to create the variable outside the function globally then it will not shows error.
def a(d):
if d == 0:
print("correct")
else:
print ("not correct")
#################
a(0)
or else you can use inbuilt function global() if you want to use the variable inside the different functions.
and make sure you have the functions as well.
I'm speaking about the general case. Here's an example:
c = 1
def a():
def b():
print(c)
b()
c = 2
a()
This code will return the following error:
NameError: free variable 'c' referenced before assignment in enclosing scope. While the logical assumption is that the output should be 1. What is the Pythonic solution to this issue? Use the global or nonlocal statements (which I don't like)? Maybe just avoid such situations, where multiple scopes share variables with identical names?
Passing it as a parameter
When passing a outside variable as a parameter, avoid reusing names unless it's not possible that this variable can handle any other variable as parameter, then it doesn't really matter otherwise it will be confusing if you pass d the next time and you do operations on c within the function.
Secondly, the value of c will not get modified within the function even if changing name from param to c (it has very little meaning) when passing as a variable because it's not considered as a global varaible, even tho the variable is an object it will only be a object in this function unless you pass it into a class.
c = 1
def a(param):
def b():
print(param)
b()
param = 2
a(c)
You would need to stick to the global option if you don't want to pass it as a parameter and you still want to affect c outside of your function.
The global option will affect the "outside" c variable as your want it to.. but this is not really considered best practice, avid it if possible.
c = 1
def a():
global c
def b():
print(c)
b()
c = 2
a()
Here's what i would recommend:
c = 1
def a(param):
def b():
print(param)
b()
param = 2
return param
c = a(c)
Or even:
c = 1
def b(param):
print(param)
def a(param):
b(param)
param = 2
return param
c = a(c)