From: SpringFlowers AutumnMoon Date: 2007-09-30T03:12:28+09:00 Subject: Re: a = Dog.new # a is not a pointer and not a reference? Morton Goldberg wrote: > On Sep 29, 2007, at 1:16 PM, SpringFlowers AutumnMoon wrote: > > I think it best to think of a Ruby variable as holding a reference to > an object. Ruby's reference semantics are different from C++'s, but > IMO more mainstream. C++'s reference semantics are peculiar, to say > the least, and perhaps even unique [*]. Ruby's variable semantics are > simple and clean when compared to C++, so I recommend forgetting > about making such comparisons. hm... so you mean best to think of a Ruby variable as holding a pointer to an object? I hope either 1) we use the word "reference" to mean a pointer 2) or, we just use the word pointer instead, that's because "reference" seems to mean something different in both C++, PHP, and in the general computer science area. -- Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.