twic at urchin.earth.li
Wed Dec 14 19:42:26 CET 2005
On Tue, 13 Dec 2005, Xavier Morel wrote:
> Tom Anderson wrote:
>> In what sense are the names-bound-to-references-to-objects not
> In the sense that a variable has various meta-informations (at least a
No. In a statically typed language (or possibly only a manifestly typed
language), a variable has a type; in an untyped language, it doesn't.
> while a Python name has no information. A Python name would be
> equivalent to a C void pointer, it can mean *any*thing and has no
> value/meaning by itself, only the object it references has.
Quite right - so it's also equivalent to a LISP, Smalltalk or Objective C
(to mention but a few) variable?
The sky above the port was the colour of television, tuned to a dead
More information about the Python-list