Modifying Class Object
showell30 at yahoo.com
Sun Feb 14 04:04:28 CET 2010
On Feb 13, 6:10 pm, MRAB <pyt... at mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote:
> Alf P. Steinbach wrote:
> > * Steve Howell:
> >> This thread is interesting on many levels. What is the core question
> >> that is being examined here?
> > I think that regarding the technical it is whether a Python name refers
> > to an object or not. I maintain that it does, and that the reference can
> > be copied, and that the semantics of the language requires this and is
> > defined in terms of this. Steve Holden, D'Aprano and many others
> > maintain that there are no references, or that if there are then they're
> > only an implementation aspect, i.e. that conceiveable one could have an
> > implementation without them.
> > Regarding some other issues it seems to be a childish exercise in
> > flaming, a flame war, with claims of insanity, incompetence, lying
> > (that's actually from me, I reacted a bit strongly to faked quoting +
> > conclusions from that in a posting not appearing on Usenet but on the
> > Python mail list), etc. etc. ad nauseam, sprinkled with
> > misrepresentations etc. I don't know the point of that.
> It's a pity that no-one has gone far enough to trigger Godwin's Law...
Godwin's Law need not be invoked here. The essential question is
relevant and worthy of discussion, and most posters have presented
intelligent, nuanced arguments even amidst all the needless flaming.
It is actually a subtle point that I think people disagree on,
whatever the extraneous personal baggage.
More information about the Python-list