Richard Blackwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Kent Johnson wrote: > That is exactly how I feel about it. Foo is what it is. Variable, name > bound to immutable value, etc., what we call it doesn't really change > how I program, only how I communicate with other programmers (and > mathematicians). Is the notion of variable not a fundamental concept > in programming? Surely there must be an unambiguous definition I can > relay to him.
Well, if you want to be precise, in python Foo is a pointer that holds the memory location of an object, that just happens to be int(5). Which is one of the key differences between computer languages and mathematics. The value of a variable does not necessarily have meaning as a number, but can be a character, string, or reference instead. If I say, foo = 'a', then in most cases I'm not really concerned about the numeric sum of foo + 'b'. But the argument at stake here is not technical, but linguistic. If he insists on imposing a definition from the domain of math onto the domain of computer programming, then there is no point in continuing the discussion about how the term "variable" is used in computer programming. -- Kirk Job-Sluder "The square-jawed homunculi of Tommy Hilfinger ads make every day an existential holocaust." --Scary Go Round -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
