Paul Rudin <paul.nos...@rudin.co.uk>:
> Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> writes:
>> The spec (<URL: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/datamodel.html>)
>> uses the terms *identity* and *reference*, which are one-to-one.
>
> identity isn't the same thing as a name, identity is an inherent
> property of an object - many names may refer to the same object.
x is y if and only if id(x) == id(y)
However, sorry for muddling the discussion by bringing in the identity.
I'll leave it out for now.
>> So your "names" are *variables*.
>
> Informally yes, but "variable" has no meaning in the language reference.
Really? How do you interpret these, then?
Although the definition of assignment implies that overlaps between
the left-hand side and the right-hand side are ‘simultaneous’ (for
example a, b = b, a swaps two variables), overlaps within the
collection of assigned-to variables occur left-to-right, sometimes
resulting in confusion.
<URL: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/simple_stmts.html?#assignme
nt-statements>
Assignments to __debug__ are illegal. The value for the built-in
variable is determined when the interpreter starts.
<URL: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/simple_stmts.html?#the-asse
rt-statement>
The public names defined by a module are determined by checking the
module’s namespace for a variable named __all__
<URL: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/simple_stmts.html?#the-impo
rt-statement>
It would be impossible to assign to a global variable without global,
although free variables may refer to globals without being declared
global.
<URL: https://docs.python.org/3/reference/simple_stmts.html?#the-glob
al-statement>
>> Unfortunately, virtually every word is overloaded and full of
>> preconceived notions. Hence: "pegs", "leashes", "puppies".
>>
>> The main thing is to keep those three concepts apart from each other.
>> Two notions will not suffice.
>
> Well - adding more things is confusing in IMO - we have a language
> reference, let's just use the terms in the language reference.
I have quoted "the language reference" quite a bit. Your turn.
You would be correct that there is something of an faux elitism going
around that is influencing the language spec as well to a degree. It
appears some people consider "variables," "assignments," "pointers" etc
to be too riff-raff. So people want to say Python is unlike C and has
"names," "bindings," "references" etc.
There's no shame in stating directly that Python has variables just like
C even though Python's variables are not first-class. There's no
difference between binding and assignment. And a reference is a synonym
to a pointer.
Python still has good stuff C doesn't, or even Java.
Marko
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
