Multi-dimensional list initialization

[Roy Smith]

In article <5099ec1d$0$21759$c3e8da3$76491128 at news.astraweb.com>,
 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info> wrote:

> On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 00:23:44 +0000, MRAB wrote:
> 
> >> Incorrect.  Python uses what is commonly known as call-by-object, not
> >> call-by-value or call-by-reference.  Passing the list by value would
> >> imply that the list is copied, and that appends or removes to the list
> >> inside the function would not affect the original list.  This is not
> >> what Python does; the list inside the function and the list passed in
> >> are the same list.  At the same time, the function does not have access
> >> to the original reference to the list and cannot reassign it by
> >> reassigning its own reference, so it is not call-by-reference semantics
> >> either.
> >>
> > I prefer the term "reference semantics".
> 
> 
> Oh good, because what the world needs is yet another name for the same 
> behaviour.
> 
> - call by sharing
> - call by object sharing
> - call by object reference
> - call by object
> - call by value, where "values" are references 
>   (according to the Java community)
> - call by reference, where "references" refer to objects, not variables
>   (according to the Ruby community)
> - reference semantics
> 
> 
> Anything else?
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evaluation_strategy#Call_by_sharing

Call by social network?  The called function likes the object.  
Depending on how it feels, it can also comment on some of the object's 
attributes.