Assignment not the same as defining?

Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk qrczak at knm.org.pl
Thu Oct 4 16:39:49 EDT 2001

Previous message (by thread): Assignment not the same as defining?
Next message (by thread): Assignment not the same as defining?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Wed, 3 Oct 2001 16:25:44 +0000 (UTC), Greg Weeks <weeks at vitus.scs.agilent.com> pisze:

> Based on what I've seen, the old Lisp way of talking is dying out.  But
> there is no law against the conceptual equation "object = address", and it
> does simplify things overall, in my estimation.

I would say that "object" is the value of the address, an immutable
concept, and "reference" is such address stored in a mutable place.

So variable names are associated with references, references refer
to objects, objects have values (or contents).

For example Python passes objects as arguments. Those objects are
placed in new references associated with formal parameter names.
Inside the function you can't say from which reference the object
was taken (if it was taken from a reference at all).

-- 
 __("<  Marcin Kowalczyk * qrczak at knm.org.pl http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/
 \__/
  ^^                      SYGNATURA ZASTĘPCZA
QRCZAK

Previous message (by thread): Assignment not the same as defining?
Next message (by thread): Assignment not the same as defining?
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

More information about the Python-list mailing list