On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 3:04 AM, Antoon Pardon <antoon.par...@rece.vub.ac.be> wrote: > On 25-09-17 16:29, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: >> Antoon Pardon <antoon.par...@vub.be>: >> >>> Op 25-09-17 om 15:16 schreef Marko Rauhamaa: >>>> No, I'm not. I'm talking about pointers in the abstract sense, both in >>>> case of Python and Pascal. Neither language gives any hint as to the >>>> physical nature of the pointer. >>> >>> Yes you are. Python doesn't have pointers at the language level. So if >>> you start talking pointers you are talking about implementations >>> however abstract. >> >> It is difficult to say what is the "native" Python term for the thing. >> "Binding," maybe? The language spec fails to give it a name. >> >> However, when comparing different languages, you had better unify the >> terminology or you'll be confused by purely terminological issues. > > Fine, you have two mappings, a mapping from names to identities and a > mapping from identities to values. In languages like C, Pascal, ... > an assignment changes the mapping between the identities and the > values. In languages like Python, Smalltalk, ... an assignment > changes the mapping between the names and the identities.
If by "identity" you mean the integer values returned by id(), then nope, you're still wrong - there is no mapping from identities to values. There is a mapping from name to object/value, and from an object, you can determine its identity. If you like, there's a mapping from values to identities, but not the other way around. Unless, of course, you can find something in the Python documentation that supports this two-step indirection? ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list