-----Original Message----- From: Aaron Brady [mailto:castironpi@comcast.net] Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2008 2:26 PM To: 'python-ideas@python.org' Subject: RE: [Python-ideas] generic Ref class

...

-----Original Message----- From: python-ideas-bounces@python.org [mailto:python-ideas- bounces@python.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Brady

...

-----Original Message----- From: python-ideas-bounces+castironpi=comcast.net@python.org [mailto:python-ideas-bounces+castironpi=comcast.net@python.org] On Behalf Of Adam Atlas

On 12 Jan 2008, at 15:03, Aaron Brady wrote:

...

Then:

for x in refs( listA ): x.val+= 1

Better than:

for i, x in enumerate( listA ): listA[i]= x+ 1

Don't these do different things? The latter modifies the original list, while the former, with your Ref class, apparently modifies (in a by-reference sense) a new list that is thrown away once the for loop is done.

Ah yes. Say:

listA= refs( range( 20 ) ) #or your list

then:

for x in listA: x.val+= 1

Slightly slower, but useful in addition to pass to functions too:

def squareanint( intref ): intref.val**= 2

a= 2 squareanint( a ) print a

And once again, I typo:

a= 2 squareanint( Ref( a ) ) print a

Sadly, no good. def squareanint( intref ): intref.val**= 2 a= Ref( 3 ) squareanint( a ) assert a.val== 9 Like I said, bulky but very handy some times. It's in -my- library...