passing by refference

[Doug Quale]

Erik Max Francis <max at alcyone.com> writes:

> Tim Peters wrote:
> 
> > There's no rational sense in which that can be called call-by-value.
> 
> It's call-by-value-where-all-values-are-references, which is awfully
> confusing to simply abbreviate as "call-by-value."

It is call-by-value-where-all-values-are-references.  (Describing
argument passing semantics doesn't describe the nature of values in
the language, so simply call-by-value suffices.)  I don't agree that
it's awfully confusing, although clearly I am wrong considering how
much confusion we've seen in this thread.

How do you explain assignment (binding) in Python?  The values there
are references too, right?