the global keyword:

[Marcin Rak]

Much thanks to all for their time, but Ned in particular...I learned something new about Python!!

On Saturday, 11 June 2016 22:48:32 UTC-5, Ned Batchelder  wrote:
> On Saturday, June 11, 2016 at 11:38:33 PM UTC-4, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> > On Sun, 12 Jun 2016 11:26 am, Random832 wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sat, Jun 11, 2016, at 20:09, MRAB wrote:
> > >> Not true. Importing doesn't copy the value.
> > >> 
> > >> Importing a name creates a new name in the local scope that refers to
> > >> the same object that the imported name referred to.
> > 
> > MRAB is correct here.
> > 
> > 
> > > Yes, the value of a variable is a reference to an object. Can we not
> > > have another round of this right now?
> > 
> > Sure, if you stop spreading misinformation about variables in Python and
> > cease the insanity of claiming that the value of a variable is not the
> > value you assign to it, but some invisible, unreachable "reference".
> > 
> > x = 999
> > 
> > The value of x is 999, not some invisible reference.
> > 
> > x = []
> > 
> > The value of x is an empty list, not some invisible reference.
> 
> We just went through all this.  It's clear to me that there are different
> ways of looking at these underlying mechanisms, and different people find
> truth in different ways of describing them.  The virtual world we live in
> is complex because of the differing levels of abstraction that are possible.
> Some of this disagreement is really a matter of choosing different
> abstractions to focus on.
> 
> Most importantly, it's clear to me that we aren't going to come to some
> simple consensus, certainly not by throwing around words like "insanity."
> 
> Perhaps at least in this thread we can limit ourselves to addressing the
> OP and their question directly, rather than fighting with each other over
> which answer is correct?
> 
> --Ned.