Christian Heimes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Ben Finney wrote: > > The term "reference" is fine, since that's exactly how it works. > > One gets at an object via some reference, be it a name or some > > access into a container object. When an object has no more > > references to itself, it becomes a candidate for garbage > > collection. And so on. > > Thanks you, but I know exactly how Python works. I'm actually > developing CPython and PythonDotNET.
Uh, okay. I didn't ask for you to flash your credentials, but if that is significant to you, be my guest. > Anyway your message doesn't help a newbie and it gives most > certainly the wrong impression. You are using words that have a > different meaning in other languages. If you explain Python w/o the > words variable, pointer, reference or call-by-value you have a much > better chance to explain it right. Trust me :) I've done my share of explaining of Python to people, and found "reference" to be exactly the right term to help the newbie understand what's happening and what they should expect. I agree with you on "variable", "pointer", and "call-by-value". Those don't describe how Python works, and thus only confuse the matter. Thus I avoid them, and correct newbies who appear to be getting confused because of those existing concepts. -- \ "I don't accept the currently fashionable assertion that any | `\ view is automatically as worthy of respect as any equal and | _o__) opposite view." -- Douglas Adams | Ben Finney -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
