Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #96432

Re: Python handles globals badly.

Path csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!usenetcore.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed8.news.xs4all.nl!nzpost1.xs4all.net!not-for-mail
Return-Path <python@mrabarnett.plus.com>
X-Original-To python-list@python.org
Delivered-To python-list@mail.python.org
X-Spam-Status OK 0.000
X-Spam-Evidence '*H*': 1.00; '*S*': 0.00; 'subject:Python': 0.05; 'compiler': 0.05; 'claimed': 0.07; 'objects,': 0.07; 'only,': 0.07; '"a"': 0.09; 'constants.': 0.09; 'immutable': 0.09; 'namespace': 0.09; 'sake': 0.09; 'subsequently': 0.09; 'subtle': 0.09; 'variables,': 0.09; 'python': 0.10; 'assume': 0.11; 'python.': 0.11; 'def': 0.13; 'applies': 0.15; 'interpreter': 0.15; 'variables': 0.15; '"global"': 0.16; '"michael': 0.16; 'bind': 0.16; 'considers': 0.16; 'constructs': 0.16; 'declared,': 0.16; 'from:addr:mrabarnett.plus.com': 0.16; 'from:addr:python': 0.16; 'from:name:mrab': 0.16; 'message-id:@mrabarnett.plus.com': 0.16; 'namespace,': 0.16; 'namespace.': 0.16; 'posting,': 0.16; 'received:192.168.1.4': 0.16; 'skip:n 50': 0.16; 'test()': 0.16; 'weird.': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.16; 'string': 0.17; 'basically': 0.18; "shouldn't": 0.18; 'programmer': 0.18; 'math': 0.20; 'machine': 0.21; 'saying': 0.22; 'arguments': 0.22; 'assign': 0.22; 'constant': 0.22; 'function,': 0.22; 'names.': 0.22; 'pascal': 0.22; 'variables.': 0.22; 'code.': 0.23; 'leave': 0.23; 'bit': 0.23; 'seems': 0.23; 'wrote': 0.23; "haven't": 0.24; 'previously': 0.24; 'thus': 0.24; 'written': 0.24; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.24; 'discussion': 0.24; 'module': 0.25; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.26; "doesn't": 0.26; 'appear': 0.26; 'point.': 0.27; 'define': 0.27; 'object,': 0.27; 'see,': 0.27; '(it': 0.29; 'declared': 0.29; 'dictionary': 0.29; 'flying': 0.29; 'idea,': 0.29; 'thread,': 0.29; 'code:': 0.29; 'objects': 0.29; 'there.': 0.30; 'print': 0.30; "we're": 0.30; 'work.': 0.30; 'code': 0.30; 'becomes': 0.30; 'certainly': 0.30; 'checks': 0.30; 'convention': 0.30; 'putting': 0.30; 'implement': 0.32; 'language.': 0.32; 'statement': 0.32; 'problem': 0.33; 'common': 0.33; 'usually': 0.33; 'impression': 0.33; 'instead,': 0.33; 'suddenly': 0.33; 'traditional': 0.33; 'languages': 0.34; 'this?': 0.34; 'follows:': 0.35; 'important.': 0.35; 'something': 0.35; 'level': 0.35; "isn't": 0.35; 'but': 0.36; 'should': 0.36; 'there': 0.36; 'keyword': 0.36; 'to:addr :python-list': 0.36; 'pm,': 0.36; 'subject:: ': 0.37; 'there,': 0.37; 'seem': 0.37; 'things': 0.38; 'doing': 0.38; 'guys': 0.38; 'names': 0.38; 'anything': 0.38; 'yes': 0.62; 'here.': 0.62; 'course': 0.62; 'matter': 0.63; 'to,': 0.63; 'times': 0.63; 'binding': 0.66; 'differences': 0.66; 'fundamental': 0.66; 'numerous': 0.66; 'past,': 0.66; 'talking': 0.67; 'therefore': 0.67; 'act': 0.67; 'secret': 0.72; 'special': 0.73; 'sounds': 0.76; 'forth': 0.79; '(actually,': 0.84; 'casting': 0.84; 'dict.': 0.84; 'irrelevant': 0.84; 'loose': 0.84; 'mistaken': 0.84; 'solved.': 0.84; 'wrong...': 0.84; 'clueless': 0.91; 'write:': 0.91; 'deal,': 0.93; 'from.': 0.93
X-CM-Score 0.00
X-CNFS-Analysis v=2.1 cv=CvRCCSMD c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=0nF1XD0wxitMEM03M9B4ZQ==:117 a=0nF1XD0wxitMEM03M9B4ZQ==:17 a=0Bzu9jTXAAAA:8 a=EBOSESyhAAAA:8 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=8AHkEIZyAAAA:8 a=ehDEK_CfxwL9n_7uPxEA:9 a=Jv5fYXS3W_v_mZAN:21 a=hJ5YvhPwX6bx_iEa:21 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10
X-AUTH mrabarnett@:2500
Subject Re: Python handles globals badly.
To python-list@python.org
References <c3363$547e74fe$5419aafe$24179@news.ziggo.nl> <14afe27e-0bd5-410f-8e64-0f31d496ebf2@googlegroups.com> <b695e$55f34cad$d47876e2$41259@news.ziggo.nl> <mailman.384.1442016089.8327.python-list@python.org> <52271$55f3b6a0$d47876e2$40653@news.ziggo.nl>
From MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com>
Date Sat, 12 Sep 2015 18:05:27 +0100
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
MIME-Version 1.0
In-Reply-To <52271$55f3b6a0$d47876e2$40653@news.ziggo.nl>
Content-Type text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-BeenThere python-list@python.org
X-Mailman-Version 2.1.20+
Precedence list
List-Id General discussion list for the Python programming language <python-list.python.org>
List-Unsubscribe <https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-list/>
List-Post <mailto:python-list@python.org>
List-Help <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe <https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list>, <mailto:python-list-request@python.org?subject=subscribe>
Newsgroups comp.lang.python
Message-ID <mailman.429.1442077536.8327.python-list@python.org> (permalink)
Lines 156
NNTP-Posting-Host 2001:888:2000:d::a6
X-Trace 1442077536 news.xs4all.nl 23769 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:47976
X-Complaints-To abuse@xs4all.nl
Xref csiph.com comp.lang.python:96432

Show key headers only | View raw

On 2015-09-12 06:22, Skybuck Flying wrote:
>
>
> "Michael Torrie"  wrote in message
> news:mailman.384.1442016089.8327.python-list@python.org...
>
> On 09/11/2015 03:50 PM, Skybuck Flying wrote:
>> Something which python does not seem to do currently ?!
>>
>> So that's weird.
>>
>> I will leave it at that for now.
>
> "
> Seems to me you have a completely mistaken understanding of how
> variables work in Python.  This is one of the reasons why I have said in
> the past, erroneously, that Python does not have variables.  It does of
> course but not in the same way as C or Pascal.  In those languages names
> are source-code abstractions only, and irrelevant to the compiler and
> machine code.  C and Pascal define variables as boxes that can be
> written to.  Not so in Python.
> "
>
> Well you basically said it yourself:
>
> " irrelevant to the compiler and machine code".
>
> That's kinda nice about a high level language.
>
> Programmer does not need to understand anything below the language.
>
> A python programmer shouldn't need to understand a damn thing to write:
>
> A  =  10
> A = A + 1
> print A
>
> However for sake of your discussion I will continue your arguments below,
> since I get the impression you guys are clueless how to change python
> implementation ;)
>
> "
> In Python most common objects are immutable. Meaning they can never
> change or be overwritten.  They are bound to names.  This binding is
> what makes names look like and act like traditional variables.
>
> The secret to understanding the global keyword is to understand how
> Python namespaces work.  The statement "a=5" does not assign a 5 to the
> box called "a."  Rather it binds the name "a" to the "5" object, which
> is immutable and called into existence by the interpreter
> implementation.  Subsequently "a=6" disconnects a from the 5 object,
> casting the 5 object loose to be reclaimed in some fashion that doesn't
> matter at this point.  "a" is then rebound to a new object, 6.
> "
>
> What happens for following code:
>
> A=1234567890111111
>
> Are you going to claim it's going to bind to all these numbers and then also
> multiple times ?
>
"all these numbers"? I see only one number there.

At runtime, it'll bind the name to the number, putting the pair into a
dict. (Actually, in a function, it can determine the names of all of
the local variables, so it uses 'slots' instead, as an optimisation.)

> Sounds a bit shady ?! ;)
>
> Perhaps python considers it a string ?
>
> Python applies math to strings ?
>
> Sounds a bit slow... therefore perhaps you're wrong...
>
Why would _he_ be wrong? _He_ never claimed any such thing!

> "
> When doing a look-up on a name, the interpreter first checks the local
> scope's dictionary and if it does not find the name there there, goes to
> the outer scope and so forth until you get to the module global
> namespace.  So we don't need any special keywords to do Pascal-style
> constants.  We just define them in the module and they work.  Usually we
> name them in all caps so we have a bit of a convention as to where they
> come from.  And yes we're talking about looking up strings in a
> dictionary here.
> "
>
> So big deal, solution is easy to see, invert interpreter logic:
>
> Everything declared is "not constant".
>
> Everything declared as "constant" suddenly becomes constant.
>
> And thus everything declared as not constant behaves the same way as
> "global", problem solved.
>
> "
> When binding a name to an object, the interpreter always binds a name in
> the local namespace, unless the global keyword has been used previously
> and then it goes right to the global namespace.  As has been said
> numerous times on this thread, how else would the interpreter do this?
> There simply isn't any other way that makes sense. Certainly you haven't
> made the case for it, seeing as you have some fundamental
> misunderstandings about variables in Python.
> "
>
> You didn't completely explain how the global namespace becomes writeable ?
> or re-bindeable ?
>
> (It seems not necessary to explain it you implement the constant idea, as
> explained above already).
>
> Do I have to assume that global namespace is "re-bindeable" = writeable ?
>
> "
> You keep saying things like "writing to a variable" or "declared
> variables" which just don't apply to Python because that's not how
> Python variables work.  It may appear this way on the surface, but the
> differences are subtle yet important.  Namespaces are written to, not
> variables, some objects can be mutated. Names are bound to objects, but
> variables are not declared, as a name can be bound to an object of any type.
> "
>
> Well again you didn't explain how using namespaces suddenly lead to
> "rewritable" and/or "rebinding"
>
Namespaces don't "become writeable".

The purpose of "global" is to tell the compiler that this name should
be bound in the global namespace, not the local namespace.

> if A is declared as global as follows:
>
> global A
>
> and then code is written as follows:
>
> A = 10
> A = 20
>
> def Test()
>      global A = 30
>      return
>
> How does this make A "rewriteable" ? Or "rebindable" to 30 ?
>
> "
> Namespaces are powerful constructs that give Python much of its dynamic
> nature and expressivity. Learn to use them!
> "
>
> I didn't learn anything from this posting, sorry ! ;)
>

Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: Python handles globals badly. tdev@freenet.de - 2015-09-11 14:26 -0700
  Re: Python handles globals badly. "Skybuck Flying" <skybuck2000@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-11 23:50 +0200
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 18:01 -0600
      Re: Python handles globals badly. "Skybuck Flying" <skybuck2000@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-12 07:22 +0200
        Re: Python handles globals badly. MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-09-12 18:05 +0100
          Re: Python handles globals badly. "Skybuck Flying" <skybuck2000@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-13 14:04 +0200
            Re: Python handles globals badly. Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-13 22:06 +1000
              Re: Python handles globals badly. "Skybuck Flying" <skybuck2000@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-13 14:11 +0200
                Re: Python handles globals badly. Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2015-09-13 05:17 -0700
                Re: Python handles globals badly. "Skybuck Flying" <skybuck2000@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-15 05:36 +0200
        Re: Python handles globals badly. Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2015-09-12 10:18 -0700
          Re: Python handles globals badly. "Skybuck Flying" <skybuck2000@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-13 14:06 +0200
            Re: Python handles globals badly. "Skybuck Flying" <skybuck2000@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-13 14:10 +0200
        Re: Python handles globals badly. Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 20:32 -0600
          Re: Python handles globals badly. "Skybuck Flying" <skybuck2000@hotmail.com> - 2015-09-13 14:05 +0200
    Re: Python handles globals badly. random832@fastmail.us - 2015-09-11 20:11 -0400
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 18:34 -0600
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-12 03:57 +0100
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-12 04:01 +0100
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 00:06 -0400
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 00:16 -0400
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-12 05:17 +0100
    Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” (was: Python handles globals badly.) Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-09-12 14:27 +1000
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-12 05:34 +0100
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 00:34 -0400
    Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 00:42 -0400
      Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-13 02:32 +1000
        Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 09:54 -0700
          Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 03:06 +1000
          Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2015-09-12 10:14 -0700
          Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-13 03:24 +1000
            Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 03:34 +1000
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-12 05:45 +0100
    Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-09-12 14:52 +1000
    Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 01:03 -0400
      Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-13 02:50 +1000
        Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 10:04 -0700
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 01:07 -0400
    Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-09-12 15:20 +1000
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-12 06:25 +0100
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 01:35 -0400
    Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 01:42 -0400
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-12 06:54 +0100
    Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 16:02 +1000
    Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-12 07:05 +0100
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 16:13 +1000
    Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 02:15 -0400
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 02:25 -0400
    Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-09-12 16:26 +1000
      Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 05:46 -0700
        Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Laura Creighton <lac@openend.se> - 2015-09-12 16:41 +0200
          Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 08:13 -0700
            Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" rurpy@yahoo.com - 2015-09-12 09:17 -0700
              Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 10:12 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-13 04:14 +1000
              Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-13 03:48 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" rurpy@yahoo.com - 2015-09-12 11:45 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-13 22:50 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-13 23:29 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" rurpy@yahoo.com - 2015-09-13 18:34 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-14 04:34 +0100
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" rurpy@yahoo.com - 2015-09-12 12:58 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2015-09-12 15:14 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" rurpy@yahoo.com - 2015-09-12 15:34 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-13 00:14 +0100
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2015-09-12 17:02 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 17:28 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" rurpy@yahoo.com - 2015-09-12 17:44 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-09-13 03:22 +0100
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2015-09-12 19:25 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Michael Torrie <torriem@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 20:35 -0600
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-09-13 12:42 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" rurpy@yahoo.com - 2015-09-13 08:31 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 01:39 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-09-14 06:48 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" rurpy@yahoo.com - 2015-09-13 18:13 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-09-13 12:32 -0400
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" rurpy@yahoo.com - 2015-09-12 17:23 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 16:39 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 10:19 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" rurpy@yahoo.com - 2015-09-12 17:25 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" rurpy@yahoo.com - 2015-09-12 18:07 -0700
            Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 20:54 +0300
              Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 11:21 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Jussi Piitulainen <harvesting@makes.email.invalid> - 2015-09-12 23:02 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 17:10 -0400
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-13 12:30 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Jussi Piitulainen <harvesting@makes.email.invalid> - 2015-09-13 09:40 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 23:13 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-12 17:27 -0400
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-13 21:04 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 05:03 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-13 15:04 -0400
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 02:17 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-14 11:10 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 04:22 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-14 12:38 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 06:23 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-15 02:59 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 20:24 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2015-09-14 11:29 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 22:30 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2015-09-14 13:16 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 23:32 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 11:30 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 05:26 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 09:52 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 03:30 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 10:58 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-13 19:38 -0400
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 17:48 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-14 11:10 -0400
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-15 03:03 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-14 13:34 -0400
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-16 00:26 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Emile van Sebille <emile@fenx.com> - 2015-09-14 10:51 -0700
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2015-09-16 20:14 +1200
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:18 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-09-16 18:24 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-16 18:33 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-15 03:59 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-14 14:02 -0400
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-16 00:14 +1000
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 20:45 +0300
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Random832 <random832@fastmail.com> - 2015-09-14 14:00 -0400
                Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Akira Li <4kir4.1i@gmail.com> - 2015-09-14 21:17 +0300
        Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2015-09-13 03:08 +1000
          Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Rustom Mody <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 10:26 -0700
        Re: Terminology: "reference" versus "pointer" Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2015-09-13 11:13 +1000
    Re: Python handles globals badly. Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 16:27 +1000
    Re: Terminology: “reference” versus “pointer” Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2015-09-12 16:31 +1000
  Re: Python handles globals badly. Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2015-09-11 16:10 -0600
  Re: Python handles globals badly. MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2015-09-12 00:03 +0100

csiph-web