Hrvoje Niksic a écrit : > Bruno Desthuilliers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > writes: > >>> As others have answered, an instance can live in many variables, >> "be bound to many names" would be more accurate IMHO. > > Technically more accurate maybe (but see below), but I was responding > to a beginner's post, so I was striving for ease of understanding.
The problem is that your formulation implies (to me at least) that the variable is actually a kind of container for the object. And I'm not sure being inaccurate really helps (OTHO, I often tend to get too technical, so who knows which approach is the best here... At least, the OP will now have both !-) >> Python's "variables" are name=>object bindings. > > No reason to use quotes. Yes, there's one : to mark the difference between Python-like name=>object bindings and C-like labels-on-memory-address variables - the latter model being the most commonly known to beginners. > Variable is just as acceptable a term, Indeed - no need to refer to chapter and verse here, I've read the book too !-) (snip) > I disagree with the idea that the terms "name" and "binding" are the > only correct terminology. Which is not what I meant here. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
