Origin of the term "first-class object"

[Aahz]

In article <mailman.1031.1069700370.702.python-list at python.org>,
Jp Calderone  <exarkun at intarweb.us> wrote:
>On Mon, Nov 24, 2003 at 12:33:40PM -0500, Aahz wrote:
>> In article <m8uub.235682$HS4.2034763 at attbi_s01>,
>> Rainer Deyke <rainerd at eldwood.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>I'd rather write "l[x] = f(l[x])" with all of its redundancy than wrap
>>>every conceivable immutable object in a mutable wrapper.  Besides, I
>>>don't *want* 'f' to change an object (which may also be referenced
>>>elsewhere); I want it to change a binding.
>> 
>> Well, you're going to have to pay for what you want in some fashion;
>> Python's going to keep its default semantics, so you're going to need
>> *some* kind of wrapper.
>
>  Up for a new operator?
>
>    l[index] ()= f

"Boot to the head.  <thump>"
-- 
Aahz (aahz at pythoncraft.com)           <*>         http://www.pythoncraft.com/

Weinberg's Second Law: If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote 
programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization.