Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: > In a more simplistic view, I'd reverse the phrasing... The name > "x" is assigned to the object "y" (implying it is no longer attached to > whatever used to have the name)
No, because that'd imply that the object 'y' somehow keeps track of the names assigned to it, which is only true from a refcount perspective -- and only on some Python implementations at that. The object is the property of the name, not vice versa. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
