# New scope solution

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/new-scope-solution/16707>\
**Category:** Internals & Design\
**Tags:** proposal\
**Created:** [October 23, 2018, 8:58pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/new-scope-solution/16707 "2018-10-23T20:58:16Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 66

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![StefanKarpinski](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/stefankarpinski/32/24_2.png) [@StefanKarpinski](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/StefanKarpinski)\
**Post date:** [October 26, 2018, 12:14pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/new-scope-solution/16707/66 "2018-10-26T12:14:07Z")

</div>

> [@jballanc](#):
>
> Forgive me if I’m missing something, but couldn’t we perhaps have an even simpler heuristic: variables in non-function scopes are global when they exist outside of a function scope?

This was precisely the solution previously proposed here:

> [@Another possible solution to the global scope debacle](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/another-possible-solution-to-the-global-scope-debacle/15894):
>
> The infamous issue [https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/28789](https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/28789) has been on most of our minds for a while now. Although I’ve stopped posting there, I can tell you I’ve been thinking about it a lot, as have Stefan and Jameson and others, and we have continued discussing it off and on. We should really try to get it right. Last time around, we more-or-less settled on changing only the REPL, which has the main advantage of being non-breaking for most code. But after sleeping on it, it does not …

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/new-scope-solution/16707)._