On Nov 17, 12:44 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On Nov 17, 8:54 am, "Gabriel Genellina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > Candidate to *Longest and Most Boring Thread of the Year* - started > > more than a month ago, currently discussing "The official definition > > of call-by-value", and "What't the value of an object": > > http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/t/6163956596a8c082/ > > Nice. The Python Reference defines objects, the core concept > of Python, as id, type, and value, and then leaves one clueless > about what a value is, and several notable Python contributors > declare the subject boring. > > I guess this goes a long way to explaining why the Python docs > suck so badly in many areas.
No, this goes a long way to explain why you don't need a PhD in denotational semantics or ontology to use Python effectively. The current discussion on that thread may be interesting to language lawyers and philosophers but it's pretty much irrelevant in understanding how Python works. George -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
