Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!not-for-mail
From: Antoon Pardon <antoon.pardon@rece.vub.ac.be>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Subject: Re: the global keyword:
Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2016 10:08:41 +0200
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <mailman.2.1466496556.11516.python-list@python.org>
References: <edb72d55-3a44-45f8-8122-b86d62e837c3@googlegroups.com> <njkbu8$e4c$1@dont-email.me> <f4e01b32-8a34-4479-a988-c06d580bf4ce@googlegroups.com> <njkj4c$90a$1@dont-email.me> <5766ADB1.6070907@rece.vub.ac.be> <mailman.138.1466351149.2288.python-list@python.org> <nk72bs$qq1$1@dont-email.me> <5767D023.3000708@rece.vub.ac.be> <mailman.151.1466421385.2288.python-list@python.org> <5767de77$0$1604$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <1466429357.2588517.642905033.340E5404@webmail.messagingengine.com> <mailman.154.1466429360.2288.python-list@python.org> <5768035d$0$1622$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <5768F609.2020508@rece.vub.ac.be>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Icedove/38.8.0
In-Reply-To: <5768035d$0$1622$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com>
Precedence: list
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:110220

Op 20-06-16 om 16:53 schreef Steven D'Aprano:
> On Mon, 20 Jun 2016 11:29 pm, Random832 wrote:
>
>> On Mon, Jun 20, 2016, at 08:15, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>> Bart didn't say anyone had defended it. He made an observation:
>>>
>>> "that's a good illustration of why 'y' isn't a name reference to 'x'"
>>>
>>> which is factually correct. And this does refer to the "ducks limp"
>>> thread.
>> Except it doesn't. Because no-one on that thread made the claim that it
>> is. There's absolutely nothing in the thread (except maybe earlier
>> instances of him and you misrepresenting others' claims) about 'y' being
>> a name reference to 'x', so there's nothing in that thread for it to
>> reasonably refer to.
> The thread is a discussion about name binding and references. And what do
> you know, the hypothetical "name y is a reference to name x" is, amazingly,
> about name binding and references! Hence the connection between the two.

But being about name bindings and reference doesn't imply it is about
name references.

> You know, there's not actually a rule or law that says you have to
> automatically take the contrary position to everything I say.

There is also not a rule of law that says you have to automatically introduce
semantic games into the discussion when someone else might have a point.

-- 
Antoon.