On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 5:24 AM, Grant Edwards
wrote:
> On 2017-09-26, alister via Python-list wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 14:16:47 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
>>
>>> On 2017-09-26, Ned Batchelder wrote:
On 9/25/17 10:20 PM, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 02:54 am, Ned Ba
On 2017-09-26, alister via Python-list wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 14:16:47 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
>
>> On 2017-09-26, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>>> On 9/25/17 10:20 PM, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 02:54 am, Ned Batchelder wrote:
[...]
>>> We've been asked
On 2017-09-26 18:25, alister via Python-list wrote:
>>> We've been asked nicely by the list mod to stop :)
>>
>> Perhaps we could agree on a subject line tag to be used in all
>> threas arguing about what to call the Python argument passing
>> scheme? That way the other 99% of us could pre-empt
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 4:25 AM, alister via Python-list
wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 14:16:47 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
>
>> On 2017-09-26, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>>> On 9/25/17 10:20 PM, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 02:54 am, Ned Batchelder wrote:
[...]
>>
On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 14:16:47 +, Grant Edwards wrote:
> On 2017-09-26, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>> On 9/25/17 10:20 PM, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 02:54 am, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> We've been asked nicely by the list mod to stop :)
>
> Perhaps we could a
On 26/09/2017 15:16, Grant Edwards wrote:
On 2017-09-26, Ned Batchelder wrote:
On 9/25/17 10:20 PM, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 02:54 am, Ned Batchelder wrote:
[...]
We've been asked nicely by the list mod to stop :)
Perhaps we could agree on a subject line tag to be used i
On 2017-09-26, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> On 9/25/17 10:20 PM, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 02:54 am, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>>
>
> We've been asked nicely by the list mod to stop :)
Perhaps we could agree on a subject line tag to be used in all threas
arguing about what t
Antoon Pardon :
> Op 26-09-17 om 12:09 schreef Marko Rauhamaa:
>> I don't think the clear description of Python's semantics requires the
>> use of such terms ("alias", "call by XXX"). It would be enough to
>> specify what actually happens.
>
> I agree, but the fact that one doesn't require a parti
Op 26-09-17 om 12:09 schreef Marko Rauhamaa:
> Antoon Pardon :
>
>> That wont happen as long as people continue to do damage with e.g.
>> claiming that the python assignment is not an alias operation.
>>
>> There is IMO no conceptual damage by regarding the call semantics
>> as call by reference.
>
Antoon Pardon :
> That wont happen as long as people continue to do damage with e.g.
> claiming that the python assignment is not an alias operation.
>
> There is IMO no conceptual damage by regarding the call semantics
> as call by reference.
I don't think the clear description of Python's seman
Op 26-09-17 om 11:13 schreef Ben Finney:
> Steve D'Aprano writes:
>
>> On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 10:53 pm, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>>
>>> Would we be able to end these interminable debates if we just agree
>>> that we all know how it works,
>> If only that were true. Not everyone understands Python semant
Ben Finney :
> No, we cannot just agree that we all know how it works. The well is
> poisoned for a long time, and we must diligently undo the conceptual
> damage for generations to come; and I know of no better way than
> continuing to publicly discuss how both misapprehensions are wrong.
For st
Steve D'Aprano writes:
> On Mon, 25 Sep 2017 10:53 pm, Ned Batchelder wrote:
>
> > Would we be able to end these interminable debates if we just agree
> > that we all know how it works,
>
> If only that were true. Not everyone understands Python semantics (or
> for that matter, Java/Swift/languag
On 9/25/17 10:20 PM, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 02:54 am, Ned Batchelder wrote:
[...]
We've been asked nicely by the list mod to stop :)
--Ned.
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
On Tue, 26 Sep 2017 02:54 am, Ned Batchelder wrote:
[...]
Heh, its hard to avoid getting sucked into the sinkhole of definitional debates,
isn't it? :-)
[...]
> But in this line:
>
> x = 2 + 2
>
> You can say,
>
> the value of x is 4
If we're talking about the highest level abstraction leve
Steve D'Aprano wrote:
Or perhaps I should say:
I disintegrate it really snooze to pyramid running when the ribbons they
apply to sandwiches are not the same as the sleep I use.
You could say that, and nobody would care much.
If you insisted that your personal interpretation of those
On 25-09-17 18:29, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>
> Regardless of whether I'm using Python, Swift, Java, C, Pascal or Scheme, if I
> write something like:
>
> x = Parrot(name="Polly")
>
> (using Python syntax for simplicity) and somebody tries to tell me that the
> value of x is anything but a Parrot
On Tue, Sep 26, 2017 at 2:52 AM, Tim Chase
wrote:
> On 2017-09-26 02:29, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
>> x = Parrot(name="Polly")
>>
>> (using Python syntax for simplicity) and somebody tries to tell me
>> that the value of x is anything but a Parrot instance named "Polly",
>
> So this is a Polly-morphic
On 2017-09-26 02:29, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
> x = Parrot(name="Polly")
>
> (using Python syntax for simplicity) and somebody tries to tell me
> that the value of x is anything but a Parrot instance named "Polly",
So this is a Polly-morphic constructor?
-tkc
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/l
On 9/25/17 12:29 PM, Steve D'Aprano wrote:
Regardless of whether I'm using Python, Swift, Java, C, Pascal or Scheme, if I
write something like:
x = Parrot(name="Polly")
(using Python syntax for simplicity) and somebody tries to tell me that the
value of x is anything but a Parrot instance named
20 matches
Mail list logo
