Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • SEARCH
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 9243727
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: June 18, 20262026-06-18T08:52:13+00:00 2026-06-18T08:52:13+00:00

I thought that changes to variables passed to a python function remain in the

  • 0

I thought that changes to variables passed to a python function remain in the function’s local scope and are not passed to global scope. But when I wrote a test script:

#! /usr/bin/python
from numpy import *

def fun(box, var):
    box[0]=box[0]*4
    var=var*4
    return 0

ubox,x = array([1.]), 1.
print ubox,x
fun(ubox,x)
print ubox,x

The output is:

[myplay4]$ ./temp.py 
[ 1.] 1.0
[ 4.] 1.0

The integer variable x is not affected by the operation inside the function but the array is. Lists are also affected but this only happens if operating on list/array slices not on individual elements.

Can anyone please explain why the local scope passes to global scope in this case?

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-06-18T08:52:14+00:00Added an answer on June 18, 2026 at 8:52 am

    The important thing to realize is that when pass an object to a function, the function does not work with an independent copy of that object, it works with the same object. So any changes to the object are visible to the outside.

    You say that changes to local variables remain local. That’s true, but it only applies to changing variables (i.e. reassigning them). It does not apply to mutating an object that a variable points to.

    In your example, you reassign var, so the change is not visible on the outside. However you’re mutating box (by reassigning one of its elements). That change is visible on the outside. If you simply reassigned box to refer to a different object (box = something), that change would not be visible on the outside.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I thought that a delegate instance was interchangeable with a function instance. Take the
I thought that layout is just a widget that keeps more widgets inside. But
I thought that by convention, only methods with an exclamation mark altered the object.
I thought that a 32-bit process could use at most 2GB RAM, since half
I thought that by default my Regex would exhibit the greedy behavior that I
I thought that calling BeginInvoke more than once on the same delegate instance would
I thought that this was easier… I have a asp:hyperlink control, with target=_blank ,
I thought that in principle Haskell's type system would forbid calls to impure functions
I thought that I improve performance when I replace this code: def f(a, b):
I thought that the purpose of Ruby's BigDecimal class is that it is infinitely

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.