"Fredrik Lundh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ...snip... > afaik, the Python Language Reference never defines the word "reference". > > It carefully defines words like "object" and "value", though, and terms like > "call by object" or "call by object reference" are perfectly understandable > if you use the words as they are defined in the language reference.
The Language Reference's definition of "value" is a non-definition. About "value" it says that it is one of the three things an object has. It then says some values can change and talks about mutable and immutable. But we don't know what *it* is that is mutable or immutable (other that it's called a "value" and it is something an object "has"). Further down the page it says that container objects may have references that are part of it's value. Part? Which part? Part of what? Is an attribute part of a value? I started a list of python doc problems a while ago. Right near the top is "object value defintion is useless". As I've said before, the Language Reference is badly broken and needs a major rewrite. I don't think it should be recommended to anyone as a source of authorative information (except possibly for syntax since it in mostly a Syntax Reference right now.) [I posted another version of this yesterday from Google but it has not appeared so...] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list