On 2015-06-04, Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> wrote:
> Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info>:
>
>> But you still find a few people here and there who have been exposed
>> to Java foolishness, and will argue that Python is "pass by value,
>> where the value is an implementation dependent reference to the thing
>> that you thought was the value".
>
> Why fight terminology? Definitions can't be proved right or wrong.
>
> Anyway, I would say Python definitely is in the classic pass-by-value
> camp. Here's a simple test:
>
> def f(x):
> x = 3
>
> y = 1
> f(y)
> print(y)
>
> If it prints 1, it's pass by value. If it prints 3, it's pass by
> reference.
Somebody else might just as honestly say that it's pass by reference:
def f(x):
x[2] = 2;
x = ['a','b','c']
f(x)
print(x)
If it prints ['a','b','c'], it's pass by value. If it's pass by
reference, it prints ['a', 'b', 2].
IMO, it's pass by reference.
But, discussing pass-by-this vs. pass-by-that without also discussing
the semantics of the assignment operator is rather pointless. Not
that the pointlessness of an argument is going to slow down a
thread...
--
Grant Edwards grant.b.edwards Yow! I request a weekend in
at Havana with Phil Silvers!
gmail.com
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
