Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer"
Rustom Mody
rustompmody at gmail.com
Sat Sep 12 13:12:41 EDT 2015
More information about the Python-list mailing list
Sat Sep 12 13:12:41 EDT 2015
- Previous message (by thread): Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer"
- Next message (by thread): Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Saturday, September 12, 2015 at 9:47:33 PM UTC+5:30, rurpy wrote: > Frankly, I feel a little insulted by people who presume that having > learned what a pointer is in C, that my brain is so rigid that I must > necessarily think that pointer means exactly what pointer means in C > forever after. Its more amusing than insulting Just open CPython sources and there's a pointer on every other line Best I can see, the people frothing at the mouth that python has no pointers are basically saying that "non-first-class" == "non-existent" By that same logic C has neither types nor functions Speaking as a teacher, sometimes one needs to be clean and dishonest Sometimes one needs to be honest and mop up after leaky abstractions
- Previous message (by thread): Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer"
- Next message (by thread): Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-list mailing list