Python nested functions variable scoping

When I run your code I get this error:

UnboundLocalError: local variable '_total' referenced before assignment

This problem is caused by this line:

_total += PRICE_RANGES[key][0]

The documentation about Scopes and Namespaces says this:

A special quirk of Python is that – if no global statement is in effect – assignments to names always go into the innermost scope. Assignments do not copy data — they just bind names to objects.

So since the line is effectively saying:

_total = _total + PRICE_RANGES[key][0]

it creates _total in the namespace of recurse(). Since _total is then new and unassigned you can't use it in the addition.

Here's an illustration that gets to the essence of David's answer.

def outer():
    a = 0
    b = 1

    def inner():
        print a
        print b
        #b = 4

    inner()

outer()

With the statement b = 4 commented out, this code outputs 0 1, just what you'd expect.

But if you uncomment that line, on the line print b, you get the error

UnboundLocalError: local variable 'b' referenced before assignment

It seems mysterious that the presence of b = 4 might somehow make b disappear on the lines that precede it. But the text David quotes explains why: during static analysis, the interpreter determines that b is assigned to in inner, and that it is therefore a local variable of inner. The print line attempts to print the b in that inner scope before it has been assigned.

In Python 3, you can use the nonlocal statement to access non-local, non-global scopes.

Rather than declaring a special object or map or array, one can also use a function attribute. This makes the scoping of the variable really clear.

def sumsquares(x,y):
  def addsquare(n):
    sumsquares.total += n*n

  sumsquares.total = 0
  addsquare(x)
  addsquare(y)
  return sumsquares.total

Of course this attribute belongs to the function (defintion), and not to the function call. So one must be mindful of threading and recursion.

This is a variation of redman's solution, but using a proper namespace instead of an array to encapsulate the variable:

def foo():
    class local:
        counter = 0
    def bar():
        print(local.counter)
        local.counter += 1
    bar()
    bar()
    bar()

foo()
foo()

I'm not sure if using a class object this way is considered an ugly hack or a proper coding technique in the python community, but it works fine in python 2.x and 3.x (tested with 2.7.3 and 3.2.3). I'm also unsure about the run-time efficiency of this solution.

You probably have gotten the answer to your question. But i wanted to indicate a way i ussually get around this and that is by using lists. For instance, if i want to do this:

X=0
While X<20:
    Do something. ..
    X+=1

I would instead do this:

X=[0]
While X<20:
   Do something....
   X[0]+=1

This way X is never a local variable

More from a philosophical point of view, one answer might be "if you're having namespace problems, give it a namespace of its very own!"

Providing it in its own class not only allows you to encapsulate the problem but also makes testing easier, eliminates those pesky globals, and reduces the need to shovel variables around between various top-level functions (doubtless there'll be more than just get_order_total).

Preserving the OP's code to focus on the essential change,

class Order(object):
  PRICE_RANGES = {
                  64:(25, 0.35),
                  32:(13, 0.40),
                  16:(7, 0.45),
                  8:(4, 0.5)
                  }


  def __init__(self):
    self._total = None

  def get_order_total(self, quantity):
      self._total = 0
      _i = self.PRICE_RANGES.iterkeys()
      def recurse(_i):
          try:
              key = _i.next()
              if quantity % key != quantity:
                  self._total += self.PRICE_RANGES[key][0]
              return recurse(_i) 
          except StopIteration:
              return (key, quantity % key)

      res = recurse(_i)

#order = Order()
#order.get_order_total(100)

As a PS, one hack which is a variant on the list idea in another answer, but perhaps clearer,

def outer():
  order = {'total': 0}

  def inner():
    order['total'] += 42

  inner()

  return order['total']

print outer()

>>> def get_order_total(quantity):
    global PRICE_RANGES

    total = 0
    _i = PRICE_RANGES.iterkeys()
    def recurse(_i):
    print locals()
    print globals()
        try:
            key = _i.next()
            if quantity % key != quantity:
                total += PRICE_RANGES[key][0]
            return recurse(_i)
        except StopIteration:
            return (key, quantity % key)
    print 'main function', locals(), globals()

    res = recurse(_i)


>>> get_order_total(20)
main function {'total': 0, 'recurse': <function recurse at 0xb76baed4>, '_i': <dictionary-keyiterator object at 0xb6473e64>, 'quantity': 20} {'__builtins__': <module '__builtin__' (built-in)>, 'PRICE_RANGES': {64: (25, 0.34999999999999998), 32: (13, 0.40000000000000002), 16: (7, 0.45000000000000001), 8: (4, 0.5)}, '__package__': None, 's': <function s at 0xb646adf4>, 'get_order_total': <function get_order_total at 0xb646ae64>, '__name__': '__main__', '__doc__': None}
{'recurse': <function recurse at 0xb76baed4>, '_i': <dictionary-keyiterator object at 0xb6473e64>, 'quantity': 20}
{'__builtins__': <module '__builtin__' (built-in)>, 'PRICE_RANGES': {64: (25, 0.34999999999999998), 32: (13, 0.40000000000000002), 16: (7, 0.45000000000000001), 8: (4, 0.5)}, '__package__': None, 's': <function s at 0xb646adf4>, 'get_order_total': <function get_order_total at 0xb646ae64>, '__name__': '__main__', '__doc__': None}
{'recurse': <function recurse at 0xb76baed4>, '_i': <dictionary-keyiterator object at 0xb6473e64>, 'quantity': 20}
{'__builtins__': <module '__builtin__' (built-in)>, 'PRICE_RANGES': {64: (25, 0.34999999999999998), 32: (13, 0.40000000000000002), 16: (7, 0.45000000000000001), 8: (4, 0.5)}, '__package__': None, 's': <function s at 0xb646adf4>, 'get_order_total': <function get_order_total at 0xb646ae64>, '__name__': '__main__', '__doc__': None}
{'recurse': <function recurse at 0xb76baed4>, '_i': <dictionary-keyiterator object at 0xb6473e64>, 'quantity': 20}
{'__builtins__': <module '__builtin__' (built-in)>, 'PRICE_RANGES': {64: (25, 0.34999999999999998), 32: (13, 0.40000000000000002), 16: (7, 0.45000000000000001), 8: (4, 0.5)}, '__package__': None, 's': <function s at 0xb646adf4>, 'get_order_total': <function get_order_total at 0xb646ae64>, '__name__': '__main__', '__doc__': None}

Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "<pyshell#32>", line 1, in <module>
    get_order_total(20)
  File "<pyshell#31>", line 18, in get_order_total
    res = recurse(_i)
  File "<pyshell#31>", line 13, in recurse
    return recurse(_i)
  File "<pyshell#31>", line 13, in recurse
    return recurse(_i)
  File "<pyshell#31>", line 12, in recurse
    total += PRICE_RANGES[key][0]
UnboundLocalError: local variable 'total' referenced before assignment
>>> 

as you see, total is in the local scope of the main function, but it's not in the local scope of recurse (obviously) but neither it is in the global scope, 'cause it's defined only in the local scope of get_order_total

While I used to use @redman's list-based approach, it's not optimal in terms of readability.

Here is a modified @Hans' approach, except I use an attribute of the inner function, rather than the outer. This should be more compatible with recursion, and maybe even multithreading:

def outer(recurse=2):
    if 0 == recurse:
        return

    def inner():
        inner.attribute += 1

    inner.attribute = 0
    inner()
    inner()
    outer(recurse-1)
    inner()
    print "inner.attribute =", inner.attribute

outer()
outer()

This prints:

inner.attribute = 3
inner.attribute = 3
inner.attribute = 3
inner.attribute = 3

If I s/inner.attribute/outer.attribute/g, we get:

outer.attribute = 3
outer.attribute = 4
outer.attribute = 3
outer.attribute = 4

So, indeed, it seems better to make them the inner function's attributes.

Also, it seems sensible in terms of readability: because then the variable conceptually relates to the inner function, and this notation reminds the reader that the variable is shared between the scopes of the inner and the outer functions. A slight downside for the readability is that the inner.attribute may only be set syntactically after the def inner(): ....