Reference
Steven D'Aprano
steve+comp.lang.python at pearwood.info
Wed Mar 5 19:35:33 EST 2014
On Thu, 06 Mar 2014 08:26:22 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 6, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Marko Rauhamaa <marko at pacujo.net> wrote:
>> When I talk about an object's memory address, I'm not referring to what
>> might be revealed by gdb, for example. That is, I'm not talking about
>> the process's virtual address space, nor am I talking about the
>> physical address on the address bus. I can simply define that the
>> object's memory address is whatever id() returns.
>
> Where's the complaints about circularity now? You're saying "But of
> course id() returns the address, as long as we define the address as
> 'whatever id() returns'.". Unimpeachably logical and utterly unhelpful.
That last sentence is wrong. There is nothing logical about just making
up arbitrary definitions in this way. He could invent *any* definition,
each more ridiculous than the last:
- it's the object's memory address;
- it's the object's phone number;
- it's the number of baby elephants killed by the object;
- it's the number of intergalactic empires that are, even as we
speak, rushing to Earth to invade to gain possession of that
object;
- it's the weight in metric tonnes of the electrons in the object;
(Not *actual* electrons of course, just these arbitrary inventions
of Marko's definition.)
- it's the length measured in seconds of the bitterness of the
object's kidney;
and of course:
- the number of angels that can dance on the object.
--
Steven D'Aprano
http://import-that.dreamwidth.org/
More information about the Python-list
mailing list