Re: Modifying Class Object

Hi Groetjes Albert, I spotted your comment - re: pointers http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/msg/5c1e25919b6a74bf On Feb 22, 11:44 pm, Albert van der Horst wrote: (I once studied algol 68, and never got confused about these > subjects anymore, recommended.) Having used Algol68, the

Re: Modifying Class Object

In article , Steve Holden wrote: >Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >> * Steve Holden: >>> Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >> [snip] Since in the quoting above no reference to definition of "pointer" remains: "pointer" refers to a copyable reference value as seen from the Python level, in the s

Re: Modifying Class Object

On 2/15/2010 6:09 PM, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:25:23 +, Arnaud Delobelle wrote: John Posner writes: [...] x = s[0] [...] assigns the name *x* to the object that *s[0]* refers to s[0] does not refer to an object, it *is* an object (once evaluated of course, o

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steven D'Aprano: On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:25:23 +, Arnaud Delobelle wrote: John Posner writes: [...] x = s[0] [...] assigns the name *x* to the object that *s[0]* refers to s[0] does not refer to an object, it *is* an object (once evaluated of course, otherwise it's just a Python e

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Mon, 15 Feb 2010 21:25:23 +, Arnaud Delobelle wrote: > John Posner writes: [...] >>> x = s[0] > [...] >> assigns the name *x* to the object that *s[0]* refers to > > s[0] does not refer to an object, it *is* an object (once evaluated of > course, otherwise it's just a Python expressio

Re: Modifying Class Object

John Posner writes: [...] >> x = s[0] [...] > assigns the name *x* to the object that *s[0]* refers to s[0] does not refer to an object, it *is* an object (once evaluated of course, otherwise it's just a Python expression). -- Arnaud -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf said (2/13/2010 8:34 PM): Names in Python refer to objects. Those references can be copied via assignment. That's (almost) all. And it provides a very short and neat way to describe pass by sharing. Alf also said (2/13/2010 8:43 PM): * Steve Howell: > This thread is interesting on man

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Ethan Furman: Steve Howell wrote: Going back to pointers vs. references, I think the key distinction being made is that pointers allow specific memory manipulation, although I think even there you're really just dealing with abstractions. The address 0x78F394D2 is a little bit closer to the

Re: Modifying Class Object

Steve Howell wrote: On Feb 14, 7:11 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote: On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 23:45:47 -0800, Steve Howell wrote: The term "pointer" is very abstract. Please give me a concrete definition of a pointer. A programming language data type whose value directly specifies (or "points to") a

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Feb 14, 7:11 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 23:45:47 -0800, Steve Howell wrote: > > The term "pointer" is very abstract.  Please give me a concrete > > definition of a pointer. > > A programming language data type whose value directly specifies (or > "points to") another value

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 23:45:47 -0800, Steve Howell wrote: > The term "pointer" is very abstract. Please give me a concrete > definition of a pointer. A programming language data type whose value directly specifies (or "points to") another value which is stored elsewhere in the computer memory.

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 12:15 AM, Steve Howell wrote: > On Feb 10, 6:16 am, Steven D'Aprano cybersource.com.au> wrote: > > > > Alf, although your English in this forum has been excellent so far, I > > understand you are Norwegian, so it is possible that you aren't a native > > English speaker an

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Michael Sparks wrote: > Hi Alf, > > > On Feb 12, 8:22 pm, "Alf P. Steinbach" wrote: > > Thanks for the effort at non-flaming discussion, it *is* > > appreciated. > > I would appreciate it if you tried to be non-flaming yourself, > since you can see I am not flami

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Feb 10, 6:16 am, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > > Alf, although your English in this forum has been excellent so far, I > understand you are Norwegian, so it is possible that you aren't a native > English speaker and possibly unaware that quotation marks are sometimes > ambiguous in English. > > Whil

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Feb 13, 11:21 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 21:33:50 -0800, Steve Howell wrote: > > You seem to be missing the point that "curly braces" is a concrete > > term that very specifically applies to spelling. > > And you seem to be missing the point that "pointer" is also a concre

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steven D'Aprano: On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 21:33:50 -0800, Steve Howell wrote: You seem to be missing the point that "curly braces" is a concrete term that very specifically applies to spelling. And you seem to be missing the point that "pointer" is also a concrete term that very specifically ap

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 21:33:50 -0800, Steve Howell wrote: > You seem to be missing the point that "curly braces" is a concrete > term that very specifically applies to spelling. And you seem to be missing the point that "pointer" is also a concrete term that very specifically applies to, well, poi

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Feb 13, 9:13 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 20:11:06 -0800, Steve Howell wrote: > > For a suitably wide definition of pointers CPython does indeed have > > pointers, and your example is only a weaker case of that truth.  There > > is no reductio adsurbum.  If I argued that CPy

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 20:11:06 -0800, Steve Howell wrote: > For a suitably wide definition of pointers CPython does indeed have > pointers, and your example is only a weaker case of that truth. There > is no reductio adsurbum. If I argued that CPython had curly braced > syntax that would be absurd

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Feb 13, 7:53 pm, Steven D'Aprano wrote: > On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:54:34 -0800, Steve Howell wrote: > > On Feb 13, 6:41 pm, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote: > > > Regardless of how CPython manages its state internally, Python as a > > > programming language does not have pointers.   > > > I agr

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:54:34 -0800, Steve Howell wrote: > On Feb 13, 6:41 pm, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote: > > Regardless of how CPython manages its state internally, Python as a > > programming language does not have pointers.   > > I agree with your statement for a suitably narrow definit

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Aahz: In article , Alf P. Steinbach wrote: My original statement, with reference to the Java language spec, didn't say much more about the language than that it has assignable references. Assuming this is what you're referring to: Python passes pointers by value, just as e.g. Java does

Re: Modifying Class Object

This thread is interesting on many levels. What is the core question that is being examined here? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:26:24 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > Yes, I do count this as a personal attack and flaming. > > The litmus test for that is that it says something very negative about > the person you're debating with. As negative as accusing somebody of intentionally lying? Or is it on

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Bruno Desthuilliers: Alf P. Steinbach a écrit : (snip) This group has an extraordinary high level of flaming and personal attacks Oh my... (snip remaining non-sense) Mr Steinbach, I bet you'll count this as another "flaming" and "personal attack", but nonetheless : you might have happier

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach a écrit : (snip) This group has an extraordinary high level of flaming and personal attacks Oh my... (snip remaining non-sense) Mr Steinbach, I bet you'll count this as another "flaming" and "personal attack", but nonetheless : you might have happier time if you were able t

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Feb 13, 6:10 pm, MRAB wrote: > Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > > * Steve Howell: > >> This thread is interesting on many levels.  What is the core question > >> that is being examined here? > > > I think that regarding the technical it is whether a Python name refers > > to an object or not. I mainta

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Feb 13, 6:41 pm, a...@pythoncraft.com (Aahz) wrote: > In article , > Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > > > > >My original statement, with reference to the Java language spec, > >didn't say much more about the language than that it has assignable > >references. > > Assuming this is what you're referring

Re: Modifying Class Object

In article , Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > >My original statement, with reference to the Java language spec, >didn't say much more about the language than that it has assignable >references. Assuming this is what you're referring to: Python passes pointers by value, just as e.g. Java does. Then

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Steve Howell: This thread is interesting on many levels. What is the core question that is being examined here? I think that regarding the technical it is whether a Python name refers to an object or not. I maintain that it does, and that the reference can be copie

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steve Holden: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Steve Holden: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Michael Sparks: [Due to the appearance of reasoned discussion (it's not practical to read it all!) [...] Therefore to say "in reality the implementation will be passing a reference or pointer" is invalid. There

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Steve Holden: >> Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >>> * Michael Sparks: >>> [Due to the appearance of reasoned discussion (it's not practical to >>> read it all!) >> [...] Therefore to say "in reality the implementation will be passing a reference or pointer" is invalid

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steve Howell: This thread is interesting on many levels. What is the core question that is being examined here? I think that regarding the technical it is whether a Python name refers to an object or not. I maintain that it does, and that the reference can be copied, and that the semantics

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Benjamin Kaplan: On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: At this point consider whether it's possible to implement Pascal in Haskell. If it is possible, then you have a problem wrt. drawing conclusions about pointers in Pascal, uh oh, they apparently can't exist. But if it

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 7:50 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > > At this point consider whether it's possible to implement Pascal in Haskell. > > If it is possible, then you have a problem wrt. drawing conclusions about > pointers in Pascal, uh oh, they apparently can't exist. > > But if it is not pos

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Steve Holden: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Michael Sparks: [Due to the appearance of reasoned discussion (it's not practical to read it all!) [...] Therefore to say "in reality the implementation will be passing a reference or pointer" is invalid. There is after all at

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steve Holden: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Michael Sparks: [Due to the appearance of reasoned discussion (it's not practical to read it all!) [...] Therefore to say "in reality the implementation will be passing a reference or pointer" is invalid. There is after all at least one implementation

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 07:59:42 -0800, Michael Sparks wrote: > Now, if I define a language, this has 3 main parts: >* Syntax >* Semantics >* Implementation [snip] Michael, that is remarkable. Excellent work, thank you! -- Steven -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Michael Sparks: > [Due to the appearance of reasoned discussion (it's not practical to read it > all!) [...] >> Therefore to say "in reality the implementation will be passing a >> reference or pointer" is invalid. There is after all at least one >> implementation that

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Michael Sparks: [Due to the appearance of reasoned discussion (it's not practical to read it all!), I felt it necessary to respond. It turned out to be a long sequence of trivial fallacies, peppered with various allegations and insinuations.] [snip extremely much] Now let's move to the

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Aahz: In article , Steve Holden wrote: Whether in CPython, Jython or IronPython the value returned by calling id(x) (whether x is a literal, a simple name or a more complex expression) is absolutely no use as an accessor: it does not give you access to the referenced value. If you disagree,

Re: Modifying Class Object

Hi Alf, On Feb 12, 8:22 pm, "Alf P. Steinbach" wrote: > Thanks for the effort at non-flaming discussion, it *is* > appreciated. I would appreciate it if you tried to be non-flaming yourself, since you can see I am not flaming you. I was seeking to educate you on a simple matter which you seem

Re: Modifying Class Object

In article , Dennis Lee Bieber wrote: >On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 18:23:46 -0800 (PST), rantingrick > declaimed the following in >gmane.comp.python.general: >> >> This entire thread has imploded like a neutron star into an infantile >> debate that only Caddie Couric, Bill O Reilly, and everyone on PMS-N

Re: Modifying Class Object

In article , Steve Holden wrote: > >Whether in CPython, Jython or IronPython the value returned by calling >id(x) (whether x is a literal, a simple name or a more complex >expression) is absolutely no use as an accessor: it does not give you >access to the referenced value. > >If you disagree, pl

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 6:23 PM, rantingrick wrote: [blah, blah, blah] First of all, we all know how D Aprano has such an unfettered ego > problem. [blah, blah, blah] And as always the roaches start > coming out of the woodwork in a most "pathetic puppy dog" way. What > would you puppets do if

Re: Modifying Class Object

This entire thread has imploded like a neutron star into an infantile debate that only Caddie Couric, Bill O Reilly, and everyone on PMS-NBC can hold a candle to! The only post i enjoyed was Steve Howes! >From my unique perspective of not really knowing (or for that matter) really caring about any

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Mark Lawrence: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: An extremely long thread dedicated to the notion that there are no references in Python (which is blatantly false), coupled with personal attacks on the one person arguing that there are. I could easily think that you were having me on. Of course most

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Steven D'Aprano: On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:26:24 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: Yes, I do count this as a personal attack and flaming. The litmus test for that is that it says something very negative about the person you're debating with. As negative as accusing someb

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: [...] > Of course most anyone else who'd hold the > rational opinion would not join the battlefield, because it clearly > wasn't and isn't about convincing or educating anyone, but I feel that > follow-ups to my articles should be answered. > In other words, you must have t

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steven D'Aprano: On Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:26:24 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: Yes, I do count this as a personal attack and flaming. The litmus test for that is that it says something very negative about the person you're debating with. As negative as accusing somebody of intentionally lyin

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steve Holden: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: You may note that that Wikipedia article refers to an article that I wrote about pointers in C++. It's a broken link, referring to a non-existent server. Yes, sorry. It's been that way a long time, and for the same reason my C++ tutorial, the only on

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > You may note that that Wikipedia article refers to an article that I > wrote about pointers in C++. > It's a broken link, referring to a non-existent server. regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 PyCon is coming! Atlanta, Feb 2010 h

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Michael Sparks: Hi Alf, Before I start, note we're talking about semantics, not implementation. That distinction is very important. Yes. It would seem to readers that posters here do not grasp and are unable to grasp that distinction. However, all those references to implementation aspe

Re: Modifying Class Object

Hi Alf, Before I start, note we're talking about semantics, not implementation. That distinction is very important. On Feb 11, 4:49 am, "Alf P. Steinbach" wrote: > > *The* standard general language independent definition? [ of pointer ] > Yes. > > > As defined where? > > For example, as I use

Re: Modifying Class Object

Well at least you are well written and more subtle than Xah Lee. Though I find him also quite amusing, I do like a good flame-war every now and again, and in that perspective I solute you. -- mph -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Martin P. Hellwig: Well at least you are well written and more subtle than Xah Lee. Though I find him also quite amusing, I do like a good flame-war every now and again, and in that perspective I solute you. The technical discussion is now at point where one poster maintains that reference

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steven D'Aprano: On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 23:26:34 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: I presume you agree that the name 'Alf P. Steinbach' refers to you. Do you then consider it to be a 'reference' to you? Yes, and that's irrelevant, because you can't change a name. Pardon me, but you most certainl

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 23:26:34 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >> I presume you agree that the name 'Alf P. Steinbach' refers to you. Do >> you then consider it to be a 'reference' to you? > > Yes, and that's irrelevant, because you can't change a name. Pardon me, but you most certainly can. Even G

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 17:11:17 -0500, Terry Reedy wrote: > About 13 years ago, I noticed that electronically executable Python was > very similar to some of the designed-for-human-reading algoritm > languages (pseudocode) that were not. I then coined the oxymoron > 'executable pseudocode' for Python

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Terry Reedy: On 2/11/2010 1:37 AM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: Consider just the assert( t is not s ) t = s Does this change anything at all in the computer's memory? By 'computer', do you mean 'anything that computes' (including humans) or specifically 'electronic computer'? In this contex

Re: Modifying Class Object

On 2/11/2010 1:37 AM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: Consider just the assert( t is not s ) t = s Does this change anything at all in the computer's memory? By 'computer', do you mean 'anything that computes' (including humans) or specifically 'electronic computer'? But since it does have an eff

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steve Holden: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Steve Holden: [...] In this particular part of the thread I am attempting, unsuccessfully, to convince you that a change in *your* behavior would lead to less hostility directed towards the way you present your ideas. You apparently feel it is quite a

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steve Holden: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Steven D'Aprano: [...] accusing them of lying for having an opinion that differs from yours, That is untrue. Well, that says it all really. You seem to insinuate that I'm saying that Steven is lying, and/or that Steven is lying. From context an

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Steven D'Aprano: [...] >> accusing them of lying for having an opinion that differs from yours, > > That is untrue. > Well, that says it all really. regards Steve -- Steve Holden +1 571 484 6266 +1 800 494 3119 PyCon is coming! Atlanta, Feb 2010 http://

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Steve Holden: [...] >> In this particular part of the thread I am attempting, unsuccessfully, >> to convince you that a change in *your* behavior would lead to less >> hostility directed towards the way you present your ideas. >> >> You apparently feel it is quite accept

Re: Modifying Class Object

"Alf P. Steinbach" writes: [...] > That's bullshit. [...] > not any that you know about. [...] > yet another ad hominem attack [...] > It also reflects rather badly on you. [...] > - Alf Alf, The above was extracted from the last post from you but I could have picked almost any of your recent e

Re: Modifying Class Object

* I V: On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 07:37:35 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Steven D'Aprano: s = [1] t = s # Binds the name t to the object bound to the name s. t[0] = 2 # Changes the object bound to the name t print(s) # Checks the object via the original name. Notice that your ver

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Thu, 11 Feb 2010 07:37:35 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Steven D'Aprano: >> s = [1] >> t = s # Binds the name t to the object bound to the name s. >> t[0] = 2 # Changes the object bound to the name t print(s) # >> Checks the object via the original name. >> >> Notice that

Re: Modifying Class Object

* alex23: "Alf P. Steinbach" wrote: Telling someone to "learn to read" is a Steve Holden'sk way to imply that the person is an ignoramus who hasn't bothered to learn to read. Ad hominem. So, you are misrepresenting -- again -- and in a quite revealing way, sorry. Ad hominem. Yes, in

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steven D'Aprano: On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:56:36 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Steven D'Aprano: On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:02:14 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: "pointer" refers to a copyable reference value as seen from the Python level, in the same way as "pointer" is used by e.g. the Java la

Re: Modifying Class Object

"Alf P. Steinbach" wrote: > Telling someone to "learn to read" is a Steve Holden'sk way to imply that the > person is an ignoramus who hasn't bothered to learn to read. Ad hominem. > So, you > are misrepresenting  --  again  --  and in a quite revealing way, sorry. Ad hominem. > Yes, in this g

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:56:36 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Steven D'Aprano: >> On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:02:14 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >> >>> "pointer" refers to a copyable reference value as seen from the Python >>> level, in the same way as "pointer" is used by e.g. the Java language >

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steve Holden: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Steve Holden: So now the whole thing boils down to "Alf against the world"? The reminds me of the story about the woman who went to see her son qualify from his basic army training. When asked what she thought of the parade she said it was very nice, bu

RE: Modifying Class Object

Steve wrote: > id() simply returns a unique value identifying a particular object. In > CPython, where objects do not migrate in memory once created, the > memory > address of the object is used. In IronPython each object is assigned an > id when it is created, and that value is stored as an attrib

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steve Holden: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: * Steve Holden: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: [snip] Since in the quoting above no reference to definition of "pointer" remains: "pointer" refers to a copyable reference value as seen from the Python level, in the same way as "pointer" is used by e.g. the Jav

Re: Modifying Class Object

Stephen Hansen wrote: > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 7:49 PM, Steve Holden > wrote: > > *The* standard general language independent definition? As > defined where? > > > Wait, what happened here? > > This thread started a couple days ago; you pointed out its fu

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Steve Holden: >> >> So now the whole thing boils down to "Alf against the world"? The >> reminds me of the story about the woman who went to see her son qualify >> from his basic army training. When asked what she thought of the parade >> she said it was very nice, but t

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 7:49 PM, Steve Holden wrote: > *The* standard general language independent definition? As defined where? > Wait, what happened here? This thread started a couple days ago; you pointed out its futility, and even knowing better, I jumped in the deep end. When I realized th

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Steve Holden: >> Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > [snip] >>> >>> Since in the quoting above no reference to definition of "pointer" >>> remains: "pointer" refers to a copyable reference value as seen from the >>> Python level, in the same way as "pointer" is used by e.g. the Ja

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steve Holden: So now the whole thing boils down to "Alf against the world"? The reminds me of the story about the woman who went to see her son qualify from his basic army training. When asked what she thought of the parade she said it was very nice, but that "everyone but our Alf was out of s

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Ethan Furman: >> Steven D'Aprano wrote: >>> >>> Believe me Alf, the fact that people are taking the time to try to >>> argue with you instead of just kill-filing you is a compliment. >> >> It's a compliment I am not paying, although I am grateful to those who >> are atte

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steven D'Aprano: On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:02:27 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: For a less likely more technical interpretation, as far as I know in Python there's just one case of a pointer that does not point to anything, namely as exemplified by def foo(): print( x ) x =

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:02:27 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > For a less likely more technical interpretation, as far as I know in > Python there's just one case of a pointer that does not point to > anything, namely as exemplified by > > def foo(): > print( x ) > x = "whateve

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steven D'Aprano: On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:02:14 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: "pointer" refers to a copyable reference value as seen from the Python level, in the same way as "pointer" is used by e.g. the Java language spec. Python doesn't have "copyable reference values" in the Python level

Re: Modifying Class Object

On 2/10/2010 1:38 PM, Ethan Furman wrote: After all is said and done - if you had a truly good grasp of Python, I might buy your book even if you still had -- ummm -- a less than winning presence on the mailing list; but right now your understanding is not worth paying for. Alf, here's my sug

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Ethan Furman: Steven D'Aprano wrote: Believe me Alf, the fact that people are taking the time to try to argue with you instead of just kill-filing you is a compliment. It's a compliment I am not paying, although I am grateful to those who are attempting to teach him. At the rate it's goi

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steve Holden: Alf P. Steinbach wrote: [snip] Since in the quoting above no reference to definition of "pointer" remains: "pointer" refers to a copyable reference value as seen from the Python level, in the same way as "pointer" is used by e.g. the Java language spec. [snip] If so, then t

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:02:14 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > "pointer" refers to a copyable reference value as seen from the Python > level, in the same way as "pointer" is used by e.g. the Java language > spec. Python doesn't have "copyable reference values" in the Python level. It has objects

Re: Modifying Class Object

Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > * Duncan Booth: >> "Alf P. Steinbach" wrote: >> In CPython objects once created remain in the same memory location (and their id is their address). Compare that to IronPython where the objects themselves can move around in memory so they have no fixed

Re: Modifying Class Object

Steven D'Aprano wrote: Believe me Alf, the fact that people are taking the time to try to argue with you instead of just kill-filing you is a compliment. It's a compliment I am not paying, although I am grateful to those who are attempting to teach him. At the rate it's going, though, I don

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Steven D'Aprano: On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:13:22 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: You've dismissed at least one of my arguments with a simple hand-waving of, "That's invalid, cuz." That is not a quote of me. It is a lie. Alf, although your English in this forum has been excellent so far, I und

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Duncan Booth: "Alf P. Steinbach" wrote: In CPython objects once created remain in the same memory location (and their id is their address). Compare that to IronPython where the objects themselves can move around in memory so they have no fixed address. Try comparing the IronPython implementa

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 6:16 AM, Steven D'Aprano < st...@remove-this-cybersource.com.au> wrote: > While it is true that quoted text is officially meant to indicate a > direct quote, it is also commonly used in informal text to indicate a > paraphrase. (There are other uses as well, but they don't

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 09:13:22 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: >> You've >> dismissed at least one of my arguments with a simple hand-waving of, >> "That's invalid, cuz." > > That is not a quote of me. It is a lie. Alf, although your English in this forum has been excellent so far, I understand yo

Re: Modifying Class Object

"Alf P. Steinbach" wrote: >> In CPython objects once created remain in the same memory location >> (and their id is their address). Compare that to IronPython where the >> objects themselves can move around in memory so they have no fixed >> address. Try comparing the IronPython implementation to

Re: Modifying Class Object

> > On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > >> I do offer unsolicited help now and then, as I gave you and for which >>> Steve Holden decided that a bit of personal attack would be suitable. >> >> Really, I do have to say. It's one thing to say, "Aren't you being rude?" (pleas

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 12:13 AM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: > You've dismissed at least one of my arguments with a simple hand-waving of, >> "That's invalid, cuz." >> > > That is not a quote of me. It is a lie. > > > > The thing is, there was no basis for 'cuz' beyond "In my own head this is >> wh

Re: Modifying Class Object

* Stephen Hansen: On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Alf P. Steinbach > wrote: [abundant snips which do not accurately represent who said what where due to my own laziness] Not sure, but perhaps it's possible to mail directly to gman

Re: Modifying Class Object

On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 1:08 PM, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: [abundant snips which do not accurately represent who said what where due to my own laziness] > Not sure, but perhaps it's possible to mail directly to gmane? > > Is there *any* problem you don't have a fatuous answer for? >>>

Re: Modifying Class Object

En Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:06:02 -0300, Alf P. Steinbach escribió: * Steven D'Aprano: On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 21:04:08 +0100, Alf P. Steinbach wrote: You thought you cold do a bit of ad hominem attack. That phrase you keep using, "ad hominem"... it doesn't mean what you seem to think it means.

  1   2   >