Create a gist now

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

What would you like to do?
Understanding Python's closures
# "Understanding Python's closures".
#
# Tested in Python 3.1.2
#
# General points:
#
# 1. Closured lexical environments are stored
# in the property __closure__ of a function
#
# 2. If a function does not use free variables
# it doesn't form a closure
#
# 3. However, if there is another inner level
# which uses free variables -- *all* previous
# levels save the lexical environment
#
# 4. Property __closure__ of *global* functions
# is None, since a global function may
# refer global variables (which are also free
# in this case for the function) via "globals()"
#
# 5. By default, if there is an *assignment* to the
# identifier with the same name as a closured one,
# Python creates a *local variable*, but not modifies
# the closured one. To avoid it, use `nonlocal` directive,
# specifying explicitly that the variable is free (closured).
# (Thanks to @joseanpg). See also http://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-3104/
#
#
# by Dmitry A. Soshnikov <dmitry.soshnikov@gmail.com>
#
# (C) 2010 Mit Style License
# Define a function
def foo(x):
# inner function "bar"
def bar(y):
q = 10
# inner function "baz"
def baz(z):
print("Locals: ", locals())
print("Vars: ", vars())
return x + y + q + z
return baz
return bar
# Locals: {'y': 20, 'x': 10, 'z': 30, 'q': 10}
# Vars: {'y': 20, 'x': 10, 'z': 30, 'q': 10}
print(foo(10)(20)(30)) # 70
# Explanation:
# ------ 1. Magic property "__closure__" ----------------------------
# All `free variables` (i.e. variables which are
# neither local vars, nor arguments) of "baz" funtion
# are saved in the internal "__closure__" property.
# Every function has this property, though, not every
# saves the content there (if not use free variables).
# Lexical environment (closure) cells of "foo":
# ("foo" doesn't use free variables, and moreover,
# it's a global function, so its __closure__ is None)
print(foo.__closure__) # None
# "bar" is returned
bar = foo(10)
# Closure cells of "bar":
# (
# <cell at 0x014E7430: int object at 0x1E1FEDF8>, "x": 10
# )
print(bar.__closure__)
# "baz" is returned
baz = bar(20)
#
# Closure cells of "bar":
# (
# <cell at 0x013F7490: int object at 0x1E1FEE98>, "x": 10
# <cell at 0x013F7450: int object at 0x1E1FEDF8>, "y": 20
# <cell at 0x013F74B0: int object at 0x1E1FEDF8>, "q": 10
# )
#
print(baz.__closure__)
# So, we see that a "__closure__" property is a tuple
# (immutable list/array) of closure *cells*; we may refer them
# and their contents explicitly -- a cell has property "cell_contents"
print(baz.__closure__[0]) # <cell at 0x013F7490: int object at 0x1E1FEE98>
print(baz.__closure__[0].cell_contents) # 10 -- this is our closured "x"
# the same for "y" and "q"
print(baz.__closure__[1].cell_contents) # "y": 20
print(baz.__closure__[2].cell_contents) # "q": 10
# Then, when "baz" is activated it's own environment
# frame is created (which contains local variable "z")
# and merged with property __closure__. The result dictionary
# we may refer it via "locals()" or "vars()" funtions.
# Being able to refer all saved (closured) free variables,
# we get correct result -- 70:
baz(30) # 70
# ------ 2. Function without free variables does not closure --------
# Let's show that if a function doesn't use free variables
# it doesn't save lexical environment vars
def f1(x):
def f2():
pass
return f2
# create "f2"
f2 = f1(10)
# its __closure__ is empty
print(f2.__closure__) # None
# ------ 3. A closure is formed if there's most inner function -------
# However, if we have another inner level,
# then both functions save __closure__, even
# if some parent level doesn't use free vars
def f1(x):
def f2(): # doesn't use free vars
def f3(): # but "f3" does
return x
return f3
return f2
# create "f2"
f2 = f1(200)
# it has (and should have) __closure__
print(f2.__closure__) # (<cell at 0x014B7990: int object at 0x1E1FF9D8>,)
print(f2.__closure__[0].cell_contents) # "x": 200
# create "f3"
f3 = f2()
# it also has __closure__ (the same as "f2")
print(f3.__closure__) # (<cell at 0x014B7990: int object at 0x1E1FF9D8>,)
print(f3.__closure__[0].cell_contents) # "x": 200
print(f3()) # 200
# ------ 4. Global functions do not closure -------------------------
# Global functions also do not save __closure__
# i.e. its value always None, since may
# refer via globals()
global_var = 100
def global_fn():
print(globals()["global_var"]) # 100
print(global_var) # 100
global_fn() # OK, 100
print(global_fn.__closure__) # None
# ------ 5. By default assignment creates a local var. -----------------
# ------ User `nonlocal` to capture the same name closured variable. ---
# Since assignment to an undeclared identifier in Python creates
# a new variable, it's hard to distinguish assignment to a closured
# free variable from the creating of the new local variable. By default
# Python strategy is to *create a new local variable*. To specify, that
# we want to update exactly the closure variable, we should use
# special `nonlocal` directive. However, if a closured variable is of
# an object type (e.g. dict), it's content may be edited without
# specifying `nonlocal` directive.
# "x" is a simple number,
# "y" is a dictionary
def create(x, y):
# this simplified example uses
# "getX" / "setX"; only for educational purpose
# in real code you rather would use real
# properties (getters/setters)
# this function uses
# its own local "x" but not
# closured from the "create" function
def setX(newX):
x = newX # ! create just *local* "x", but not modify closured!
# and we cannot change it via e.g.
# child1.__closure__[0] = dx, since tuples are *immutable*
# and this one already sets
# the closured one; it may then
# be read by the "getX" function
def setReallyX(newX):
# specify explicitly that "x"
# is a free (or non-local) variable
nonlocal x
# and modify it
x = newX
# as mentioned, if we deal with
# non-primitive type, we may mutate
# contents of an object without `nonlocal`
# since objects are passed by-reference (by-sharing)
# and we modify not the "y" itself (i.e. not *rebound* it),
# but its content (i.e. *mutate* it)
def modifyYContent(foo):
# add/set a new key "foo" to "y"
y["foo"] = foo
# getter of the "x"
def getX():
return x
# getter of the "y"
def getY():
return y
# return our messaging
# dispatch table
return {
"setReallyX": setReallyX,
"setX": setX,
"modifyYContent": modifyYContent,
"getX": getX,
"getY": getY
}
# create our object
instance = create(10, {})
# "setX" does *not* closure "x" since uses *assignment*!
# it doesn't closuse "y" too, since doesn't use it:
print(instance["setX"].__closure__) # None
# do *not* modify closured "x" but
# just create a local one
instance["setX"](100)
# test with a getter
print(instance["getX"]()) # still 10
# test with a "setReallyX", it closures only "x"
# (
# <cell at 0x01448AD0: int object at 0x1E1FEDF8>, "x": 10
# )
print(instance["setReallyX"].__closure__)
instance["setReallyX"](100)
# test again with a getter
print(instance["getX"]()) # OK, now 100
# "modifyYContent" captrues only "y":
# (
# <cell at 0x01448AB0: dict object at 0x0144D4B0> "y": {}
# )
print(instance["modifyYContent"].__closure__)
# we may modify content of the
# closured variable "y"
instance["modifyYContent"](30)
print(instance["getY"]()) # {"foo": 30}

Is there a typo in line 79? Should it be 'baz'?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment