> arguably even older than that to Lisp. > Firstly, thanks to those that have responded to my part in this debate, I have found it very informative and interesting as I have the entire thread. However, with regard to comments that I led myself astray, I want to reiterate the one thing I find determinably important in this... I did not go astray because I did not fret what the words meant and try to draw anything from that. I learned exactly what would happen when I passed arguments different ways, and I learned that well and accurately. Then I mused what to call it all. At no time was I astray because I think to really be astray would be to have a misunderstanding on what happens, not on what we call what happens.
but I will concede that trying to use call-by-name is not a viable idea as it's yet another term that is already taken. I did not think too hard what the distinction is, and as far as I know it's as good a candidate for what we call it as anything else, but I certainly don't want to fight for the term. Whatever we call the passing semantics and methods in Python... it will not change what I understand about what happens with certain kinds of calls vs others. cheers. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
