no pass-values calling?

[Ben Finney]

Christian Heimes <lists at cheimes.de> writes:

> Ben Finney wrote:
> > The term "reference" is fine, since that's exactly how it works.
> > One gets at an object via some reference, be it a name or some
> > access into a container object. When an object has no more
> > references to itself, it becomes a candidate for garbage
> > collection. And so on.
> 
> Thanks you, but I know exactly how Python works. I'm actually
> developing CPython and PythonDotNET.

Uh, okay. I didn't ask for you to flash your credentials, but if that
is significant to you, be my guest.

> Anyway your message doesn't help a newbie and it gives most
> certainly the wrong impression. You are using words that have a
> different meaning in other languages. If you explain Python w/o the
> words variable, pointer, reference or call-by-value you have a much
> better chance to explain it right. Trust me :)

I've done my share of explaining of Python to people, and found
"reference" to be exactly the right term to help the newbie understand
what's happening and what they should expect.

I agree with you on "variable", "pointer", and "call-by-value". Those
don't describe how Python works, and thus only confuse the matter.
Thus I avoid them, and correct newbies who appear to be getting
confused because of those existing concepts.

-- 
 \        "I don't accept the currently fashionable assertion that any |
  `\       view is automatically as worthy of respect as any equal and |
_o__)                                opposite view."  -- Douglas Adams |
Ben Finney