On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 11:18 PM, Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.pyt...@pearwood.info> wrote: > So... although I don't go quite so far as Ben in thinking that using the > term "variable" in describing Python is harmful, I will say that the "no > variables" meme is *useful* precisely because it is so shocking and so > counter-intuitive that it forces[1] you to question your assumptions > about how programming languages operate.
Maybe the shock value is helpful, but that doesn't mean the statement's strictly correct. It seems that every time we have one of these discussions, someone claims that Python's name->object bindings are utterly unique in the world of programming, which is patently false, as a number of other languages do the same thing (often calling them variables). So what does "Python doesn't have variables" mean? Really it's "Python doesn't have variables like C's or Pascal's". ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
