On Feb 13, 11:21 pm, Steven D'Aprano <st...@remove-this-
cybersource.com.au> wrote:
> On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 21:33:50 -0800, Steve Howell wrote:
> > You seem to be missing the point that "curly braces" is a concrete
> > term that very specifically applies to spelling.
>
> And you seem to be missing the point that "pointer" is also a concrete
> term that very specifically applies to, well, pointers.
>
The term "pointer" is very abstract. Please give me a concrete
definition of a pointer.
A curly brace is one of these: { }
Pretty concrete, I hope.
> [...]
>
> > I agree that "reference" is a much better term than "pointer.". It has
> > the right amount of generalness in my opinion. I think "violence" is a
> > bit overstated, but your bigger point is well taken and it seems like
> > "reference" is useful middle ground between pure cpython language and
> > misrepresentative analogy.
>
> But reference also has a concrete meaning: C++ has a type explicitly
> called "reference":
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reference_(C++)
>
Of course, "reference" has concrete meanings in specific contexts.
But I can refer you to much more general and abstract uses of the term
"reference." Do you want references? I will be happy to refer you
to appropriate references.
> And of course call-by-reference (or pass-by-reference) has a specific,
> technical meaning.
>
Which is what?
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
