On Wed, 07 Nov 2012 00:23:44 +0000, MRAB wrote: >> Incorrect. Python uses what is commonly known as call-by-object, not >> call-by-value or call-by-reference. Passing the list by value would >> imply that the list is copied, and that appends or removes to the list >> inside the function would not affect the original list. This is not >> what Python does; the list inside the function and the list passed in >> are the same list. At the same time, the function does not have access >> to the original reference to the list and cannot reassign it by >> reassigning its own reference, so it is not call-by-reference semantics >> either. >> > I prefer the term "reference semantics".
Oh good, because what the world needs is yet another name for the same behaviour. - call by sharing - call by object sharing - call by object reference - call by object - call by value, where "values" are references (according to the Java community) - call by reference, where "references" refer to objects, not variables (according to the Ruby community) - reference semantics Anything else? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evaluation_strategy#Call_by_sharing -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
