UnboundLocalError can be solved by changing the scope of the variable which is complaining. You need to explicitly declare the variable global. Variable x's scope in function printx is global. You can verify the same by printing the value of x in terminal and it will be 6.
The Python "UnboundLocalError: Local variable referenced before assignment" occurs when we reference a local variable before assigning a value to it in a function. To solve the error, mark the variable as global in the function definition, e.g. global my_var .
The UnboundLocalError: local variable referenced before assignment error is raised when you try to assign a value to a local variable before it has been declared. You can solve this error by ensuring that a local variable is declared before you assign it a value.
The nonlocal keyword is used to work with variables inside nested functions, where the variable should not belong to the inner function. Use the keyword nonlocal to declare that the variable is not local.
Python treats variables in functions differently depending on whether you assign values to them from inside or outside the function. If a variable is assigned within a function, it is treated by default as a local variable. Therefore, when you uncomment the line you are trying to reference the local variable c
before any value has been assigned to it.
If you want the variable c
to refer to the global c = 3
assigned before the function, put
global c
as the first line of the function.
As for python 3, there is now
nonlocal c
that you can use to refer to the nearest enclosing function scope that has a c
variable.
Python is a little weird in that it keeps everything in a dictionary for the various scopes. The original a,b,c are in the uppermost scope and so in that uppermost dictionary. The function has its own dictionary. When you reach the print(a)
and print(b)
statements, there's nothing by that name in the dictionary, so Python looks up the list and finds them in the global dictionary.
Now we get to c+=1
, which is, of course, equivalent to c=c+1
. When Python scans that line, it says "aha, there's a variable named c, I'll put it into my local scope dictionary." Then when it goes looking for a value for c for the c on the right hand side of the assignment, it finds its local variable named c, which has no value yet, and so throws the error.
The statement global c
mentioned above simply tells the parser that it uses the c
from the global scope and so doesn't need a new one.
The reason it says there's an issue on the line it does is because it is effectively looking for the names before it tries to generate code, and so in some sense doesn't think it's really doing that line yet. I'd argue that is a usability bug, but it's generally a good practice to just learn not to take a compiler's messages too seriously.
If it's any comfort, I spent probably a day digging and experimenting with this same issue before I found something Guido had written about the dictionaries that Explained Everything.
It doesn't scan the code twice, but it does scan the code in two phases, lexing and parsing.
Consider how the parse of this line of code works. The lexer reads the source text and breaks it into lexemes, the "smallest components" of the grammar. So when it hits the line
c+=1
it breaks it up into something like
SYMBOL(c) OPERATOR(+=) DIGIT(1)
The parser eventually wants to make this into a parse tree and execute it, but since it's an assignment, before it does, it looks for the name c in the local dictionary, doesn't see it, and inserts it in the dictionary, marking it as uninitialized. In a fully compiled language, it would just go into the symbol table and wait for the parse, but since it WON'T have the luxury of a second pass, the lexer does a little extra work to make life easier later on. Only, then it sees the OPERATOR, sees that the rules say "if you have an operator += the left hand side must have been initialized" and says "whoops!"
The point here is that it hasn't really started the parse of the line yet. This is all happening sort of preparatory to the actual parse, so the line counter hasn't advanced to the next line. Thus when it signals the error, it still thinks its on the previous line.
As I say, you could argue it's a usability bug, but its actually a fairly common thing. Some compilers are more honest about it and say "error on or around line XXX", but this one doesn't.
Taking a look at the disassembly may clarify what is happening:
>>> def f():
... print a
... print b
... a = 1
>>> import dis
>>> dis.dis(f)
2 0 LOAD_FAST 0 (a)
3 PRINT_ITEM
4 PRINT_NEWLINE
3 5 LOAD_GLOBAL 0 (b)
8 PRINT_ITEM
9 PRINT_NEWLINE
4 10 LOAD_CONST 1 (1)
13 STORE_FAST 0 (a)
16 LOAD_CONST 0 (None)
19 RETURN_VALUE
As you can see, the bytecode for accessing a is LOAD_FAST
, and for b, LOAD_GLOBAL
. This is because the compiler has identified that a is assigned to within the function, and classified it as a local variable. The access mechanism for locals is fundamentally different for globals - they are statically assigned an offset in the frame's variables table, meaning lookup is a quick index, rather than the more expensive dict lookup as for globals. Because of this, Python is reading the print a
line as "get the value of local variable 'a' held in slot 0, and print it", and when it detects that this variable is still uninitialised, raises an exception.
Python has rather interesting behavior when you try traditional global variable semantics. I don't remember the details, but you can read the value of a variable declared in 'global' scope just fine, but if you want to modify it, you have to use the global
keyword. Try changing test()
to this:
def test():
global c
print(a)
print(b)
print(c) # (A)
c+=1 # (B)
Also, the reason you are getting this error is because you can also declare a new variable inside that function with the same name as a 'global' one, and it would be completely separate. The interpreter thinks you are trying to make a new variable in this scope called c
and modify it all in one operation, which isn't allowed in Python because this new c
wasn't initialized.
The best example that makes it clear is:
bar = 42
def foo():
print bar
if False:
bar = 0
when calling foo()
, this also raises UnboundLocalError
although we will never reach to line bar=0
, so logically local variable should never be created.
The mystery lies in "Python is an Interpreted Language" and the declaration of the function foo
is interpreted as a single statement (i.e. a compound statement), it just interprets it dumbly and creates local and global scopes. So bar
is recognized in local scope before execution.
For more examples like this Read this post: http://blog.amir.rachum.com/blog/2013/07/09/python-common-newbie-mistakes-part-2/
This post provides a Complete Description and Analyses of the Python Scoping of variables:
Here are two links that may help
1: docs.python.org/3.1/faq/programming.html?highlight=nonlocal#why-am-i-getting-an-unboundlocalerror-when-the-variable-has-a-value
2: docs.python.org/3.1/faq/programming.html?highlight=nonlocal#how-do-i-write-a-function-with-output-parameters-call-by-reference
link one describes the error UnboundLocalError. Link two can help with with re-writing your test function. Based on link two, the original problem could be rewritten as:
>>> a, b, c = (1, 2, 3)
>>> print (a, b, c)
(1, 2, 3)
>>> def test (a, b, c):
... print (a)
... print (b)
... print (c)
... c += 1
... return a, b, c
...
>>> a, b, c = test (a, b, c)
1
2
3
>>> print (a, b ,c)
(1, 2, 4)
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With