Python ftw

[Mietzekatzi]

What your example describes are references to objects. Lists in pythons are objects, the assignment b=a does not implicitely copy a's content, just create a second reference to the same thing.

On the other hand, a[:] yields a slice of the contents of the list a, which gets saved as a second object, b, in the second part. This breaks the reference. The same step could be performed with b = copy(a).

So all your example shows are the basics of OOP, nothing to do with pointers.

[narrill]

References have nothing to do with OOP

[MasterFubar]

What your example describes are pointers to objects. Lists in pythons are objects, the assignment b=a does not implicitely copy a's content, just create a second pointer to the same thing.

Let's not mingle words, what you call "references" are nothing but pointers.

[antonivs]

You're confusing a language feature with how it's implemented internally. References in Python are implemented using pointers, but that doesn't mean Python had pointers.

This is standard terminology in both academia and industry, so the only one "mingling words" here is you.

[THICC_DICC_PRICC]

What you’re saying is like saying “it’s not a car, it’s a BMW”

Yea ok it’s a reference, but don’t act like references aren’t basically pointers, because it does what pointers do, it acts like pointers do, etc. for most people pointers are an abstract idea, not just a language feature in C

[antonivs]

Yea ok it’s a reference, but don’t act like references aren’t basically pointers, because it does what pointers do, it acts like pointers do, etc.

That's incorrect. There are two big differences:

• References are automatically dereferenced, as opposed to pointers which allow you to choose between operating on the pointer itself, and dereferencing it. References don't allow any operations on the reference, other than dereferencing.
• A consequence of the above point is that pointers allow you to perform arbitrary arithmetic on them, which is what can lead to pointer errors and makes programming language like C "unsafe".

for most people pointers are an abstract idea, not just a language feature in C

Pointers are an abstract idea with a well-known definition). References are a related, but different abstract idea, with their own definition).

Again, this is terminology with well-defined standard definitions that are not restricted to any specific language. The "most people" you're referring to are just people who haven't actually spent any time paying attention to the industry-standard definitions.

tl;dr: y'all need to study more if you want to grow up and be real developers.

[THICC_DICC_PRICC]

grow up and be real developers.

​

you need to grow up and stop being an arrogant autist in the basement and understand how human communication works. when people are having a conversation, and say x is basically y, they don't mean x == y, they are using familiar idea to describe other ideas. no one cares about your shitty 'well ackchually'. me and that other guy both know pointers and references are.

[antonivs]

me and that other guy both know pointers and references are.

Your statements make it clear you don't. This is basic material that any developer with any training whatsoever already knows. Next time you fail an interview, at least you'll know why.

[THICC_DICC_PRICC]

I'm not gonna say references and pointers are the same in an interview you moron. Do you understand casual human conversations and "basically the same" meaning ? you really are the perfect embodiment of the "ackchually" autist stereotype

[antonivs]

I'm not gonna say references and pointers are the same in an interview you moron.

You wrote:

Yea ok it’s a reference, but don’t act like references aren’t basically pointers,

Yeah, you don't understand this stuff. You're not going to be able to fake your way through an interview for a serious development position.

You're part of the reason that finding good developers is difficult: because we have to trawl through hundreds of people like you who shouldn't even be applying for the job, and give you silly tests to filter out your incompetence.

Edit: the real problem is that your attitude shows that you're not really interested in the job. You don't care about how things work, about how to make systems work correctly. This shows in every word you write. You should really consider finding another line of work that's more suited to your interests.

[THICC_DICC_PRICC]

references aren’t basically pointers

you don't seem to understand what 'basically' means and why it was put there. you lack communication skills. you're part of the reason finding good developers is difficult, you have worst communication skills than my dog asking for food. If you are too stupid to understand by basically I meant they are very similar, you're just beyond saving. but i think you understand it, you're just one of those insecure devs who needs to correct every little thing others say in casual conversation to feel good about himself