[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Fuzzyman wrote: > > Claudio Grondi wrote: > > > Steve Holden wrote: > > [snip..] > > > The problem here is, that I mean, that in Python it makes no sense to > > > talk about a value of an object, because it leads to weird things when > > > trying to give a definition what a value of an object is. > > > > > > > You're saying that C and Java get round that problem by sometimes > > defining value to mean 'the memory address and object is stored at'. > > That hardly seems to clarify what value *really* means, and can lead to > > some interesting confusions. > > > > Anyway - for the basic datatypes 'value' seems quite clear. It's only > > not clear what this might mean in user defined classes - where value > > means whatever you define it to mean. > I don't know much about Java but in C, I fail to see any confusion. > There is no such thing as user defined classes nor operator overload.
You may fail to see the confusion, but feel free to add to it ;-) The above gentleman is asserting that in *Python* the term value has no meaning. I asserted in response : > > Anyway - for the basic datatypes 'value' seems quite clear. It's only > > not clear what this might mean in user defined classes - where value > > means whatever you define it to mean. All the best, Fuzzyman http://www.voidspace.org.uk/python/index.shtml -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
