…ls argument (pythonGH-119235)Many users think they want a locals argument for various reasons but they do notunderstand that it makes code be treated as a class definition. They do not wanttheir code treated as a class definition and get surprised. The reason notto pass locals specifically is that the following code raises a `NameError`:```pyexec("""def f():    print("hi")f()def g():    f()g()""", {}, {})```The reason not to leave out globals is as follows:```pydef t():    exec("""def f():    print("hi")f()def g():    f()g()    """)```(cherry picked from commit7e1a130)Co-authored-by: Hood Chatham <roberthoodchatham@gmail.com>

…ls argument (pythonGH-119235)Many users think they want a locals argument for various reasons but they do notunderstand that it makes code be treated as a class definition. They do not wanttheir code treated as a class definition and get surprised. The reason notto pass locals specifically is that the following code raises a `NameError`:```pyexec("""def f():    print("hi")f()def g():    f()g()""", {}, {})```The reason not to leave out globals is as follows:```pydef t():    exec("""def f():    print("hi")f()def g():    f()g()    """)```(cherry picked from commit7e1a130)Co-authored-by: Hood Chatham <roberthoodchatham@gmail.com>

…no locals argument (GH-119235) (#119240)DOCS: Suggest always calling exec with a globals argument and no locals argument (GH-119235)Many users think they want a locals argument for various reasons but they do notunderstand that it makes code be treated as a class definition. They do not wanttheir code treated as a class definition and get surprised. The reason notto pass locals specifically is that the following code raises a `NameError`:```pyexec("""def f():    print("hi")f()def g():    f()g()""", {}, {})```The reason not to leave out globals is as follows:```pydef t():    exec("""def f():    print("hi")f()def g():    f()g()    """)```(cherry picked from commit7e1a130)Co-authored-by: Hood Chatham <roberthoodchatham@gmail.com>

…no locals argument (GH-119235) (#119239)DOCS: Suggest always calling exec with a globals argument and no locals argument (GH-119235)Many users think they want a locals argument for various reasons but they do notunderstand that it makes code be treated as a class definition. They do not wanttheir code treated as a class definition and get surprised. The reason notto pass locals specifically is that the following code raises a `NameError`:```pyexec("""def f():    print("hi")f()def g():    f()g()""", {}, {})```The reason not to leave out globals is as follows:```pydef t():    exec("""def f():    print("hi")f()def g():    f()g()    """)```(cherry picked from commit7e1a130)Co-authored-by: Hood Chatham <roberthoodchatham@gmail.com>

When updating the new exec note added inpythongh-119235 as part of thePEP 667 general docs PR, I suggested a workaround that isn't valid.Since it's far from the first time I've considered that workaround,and the fact it doesn't work has surprised me every time, amend thenew note to explicitly state that dict merging is the only option.

When updating the new exec note added ingh-119235 as part of thePEP 667 general docs PR, I suggested a workaround that isn't valid.The first half of the note is still reasonable, so just omit the invalid text.

When updating the new exec note added inpythongh-119235 as part of thePEP 667 general docs PR, I suggested a workaround that isn't valid.The first half of the note is still reasonable, so just omit the invalid text.(cherry picked from commit31d61a7)Co-authored-by: Alyssa Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com>

When updating the new exec note added ingh-119235 as part of thePEP 667 general docs PR, I suggested a workaround that isn't valid.The first half of the note is still reasonable, so just omit the invalid text.(cherry picked from commit31d61a7)Co-authored-by: Alyssa Coghlan <ncoghlan@gmail.com>

…ls argument (pythonGH-119235)Many users think they want a locals argument for various reasons but they do notunderstand that it makes code be treated as a class definition. They do not wanttheir code treated as a class definition and get surprised. The reason notto pass locals specifically is that the following code raises a `NameError`:```pyexec("""def f():    print("hi")f()def g():    f()g()""", {}, {})```The reason not to leave out globals is as follows:```pydef t():    exec("""def f():    print("hi")f()def g():    f()g()    """)```

When updating the new exec note added inpythongh-119235 as part of thePEP 667 general docs PR, I suggested a workaround that isn't valid.The first half of the note is still reasonable, so just omit the invalid text.