On Thu, May 8, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Joseph Martinot-Lagarde <joseph.martinot-laga...@m4x.org> wrote: > For me, names bound to values is the same concept as pointer pointing to > memory. bar = foo copies the pointer and not the underlying memory. This is > not a foreign concept to C programmers. >
That is how it's implemented in CPython, after all... modulo the whole refcounting thing, of course. But that's not strictly a part of the definition of Python; it's just implementation. You could implement Python on pencil-and-paper (aka a dry run), and as long as you have a concept of names that reference objects, it's going to be fine. The "reference" might be done with a physical piece of string connecting a Post-It note with a name to a box with the object's state, meaning there's no way of copying any pointer, and it's still Python. ChrisA -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
