To start with, I'm new at Python, so if this is something relatively
ordinary or a symptom of thinking in C++, I apologize...
Anyhow, I'm currently trying to write a means of generating
genetic-programming functions in Python; the details would be a little
much for a Usenet post, but suffice it to
Devan L wrote:
> Well, for one, in your __init__ method, you never do anything with
> anOpcode. You simply assign the name 'opcode' to anOpcode. The reason
> why everything is the same is that you're accessing
> TreeCommand.children or Treecommand.opcode, which is shared by all
> instances unles
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> ex_ottoyuhr wrote:
> > class TreeCommand:
> > opcode = 0
> > children = []
> > def __init__(self, anOpcode) :
> > opcode = anOpcode
> >
> opcode and children in this case is more like "class" var
I'm trying to create a function that can take arguments, say, foo and
bar, and modify the original copies of foo and bar as well as its local
versions -- the equivalent of C++ funct(&foo, &bar).
I've looked around on this newsgroup and elsewhere, and I gather that
this is a very common concern in
(Re. mutability question:)
Update, never mind. I found that the FooWrapper solution isn't so bad
after all -- and even better is putting the variable in question in a
different module entirely.
However, anyone who wants to answer the question is still welcome to.
Sorry to be a bother, and to have
