On Nov 18, 10:22 am, Steve Holden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > [...] > > > One of the reasons I would like to formulate a good > > model of an object's value and type is so that I could > > try to offer something better. Responses like yours > > are significantly demotivating. > > And yet you argue when people try to explain to you that objects don't > *have* values, objects *are* values. Objects have attributes, which are > references to other values. One of an object's attributes is its type. [...]
Steve, since Gabriel does not want to go for the record in this thread :-), I posted my response as a reply to your most recent message in the "Official definition of call-by-value..." thread. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
