Alex Martelli wrote:
> Ben Sizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>...
> > assignment semantics that differ from languages such as C++ and Java,
> > not the calling mechanism. In C++, assignment means copying a value. In
> > Python, assignment means reassigning a reference.
>
> And in Java, it means
Mike Meyer wrote:
> This is where we disagree. I think their understanding of references
> is dead on. What's broken is their understanding of what variables are
> and what assignments mean. Once you fix that, the rest falls into
> place.
>
> (Steven D'Aprano wrote:)
> > The fact that call by objec
Mike Meyer wrote:
> This is where we disagree. I think their understanding of references
> is dead on. What's broken is their understanding of what variables are
> and what assignments mean. Once you fix that, the rest falls into
> place.
>
> (Steven D'Aprano wrote:)
> > The fact that call by objec
Mike Meyer wrote:
> This is where we disagree. I think their understanding of references
> is dead on. What's broken is their understanding of what variables are
> and what assignments mean. Once you fix that, the rest falls into
> place.
>
> (Steven D'Aprano wrote:)
> > The fact that call by objec
Mike Meyer wrote:
> This is where we disagree. I think their understanding of references
> is dead on. What's broken is their understanding of what variables are
> and what assignments mean. Once you fix that, the rest falls into
> place.
>
> (Steven D'Aprano wrote:)
> > The fact that call by objec
Ben Sizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...
> assignment semantics that differ from languages such as C++ and Java,
> not the calling mechanism. In C++, assignment means copying a value. In
> Python, assignment means reassigning a reference.
And in Java, it means just the same as in Python (with s
Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 11:17:44 -0500, Mike Meyer wrote:
>> While telling them that "You can't do call by reference because Python
>> is call by object" may be correct,
> Good to see you finally concede it.
I'm not conceeding anything, because I never sa
On Thu, 05 Jan 2006 11:17:44 -0500, Mike Meyer wrote:
> While telling them that "You can't do call by reference because Python
> is call by object" may be correct,
Good to see you finally concede it.
> it leaves out the critical information.
As does "call by reference" or "call by value". No t
"Ben Sizer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But, if you separate the calling mechanism from the assignment
> mechanism, then Python does behave like every other call by reference
> language. The problem is that people expect to then be able to change
> the value of the referred object with the assign
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> On reading back over my post, I realise that it might
> sound like I was mad at KraftDiner. My apologies -- I'm
> not, I feel (s)he is the victim of incorrect
> information here, not the culprit.
>
> After all, as a Python newbie, how is KraftDiner
> supposed to know that
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On Wed, 04 Jan 2006 10:54:17 -0800, KraftDiner wrote:
>>I though the contents of lst would be modified.. (After reading that
>>'everything' is a refrence.)
>
> See, this confusion is precisely why I get the urge to slap people who
> describe Python as "call by reference"
11 matches
Mail list logo
