OT: C vs Python terminology

[Andreas Perstinger]

On 16.06.2013 14:55, Dave Angel wrote:
> On 06/16/2013 07:22 AM, Andreas Perstinger wrote:
>> On 16.06.2013 08:32, Denis McMahon wrote:
>>> C:
^^^^^^^^^

>>>
>>> int a, b;
>>> b = 6;
>>> a = b;
>>>
>>> In C, this places the numeric value 6 into the memory location identified
^^^^^^^^^^^^^

>>> by the variable "b",
>>
>> so far so good.
>>
>>> then copies the value from the location pointed to by "b" into the
>>> location pointed to by "a".
>>
>> Wrong. Neither "a" nor "b" are pointers, thus they don't point to a
>> memory location.
>> This part should be written as
>> "then copies the value at the location identified by "b" to the location
>> identified by "a".
>
> But it doesn't.  It binds b to the same object to which a is currently
> bound.

Are you aware that Denis was talking about the behaviour of C in the 
above quote?

>>> b is a pointer to a memory location containing the value 6
>>  > a is a pointer to another memory location also containing the value 6
>>
>> Again, neither "a" nor "b" are pointers.
>> "b" is the name of a memory location containing the integer value 6.
>> "a" is the name of another memory location containing the integer value 6.
>>
>
> Not even close.  If you don't like the terms "bound" or "points", the
> perhaps you'd be happy with "b" is the name that currently knows how to
> find an int object containing 6.  That object has no name, and never
> will.  And it can exist for a long time with no names directly bound to it.

Again, Denis was talking about C.

Bye, Andreas