Java is Pass-By-Value, Dammit!
Quite possibly the most important article I've ever read, because it finally, finally explains to me what Java's object-passing model is really all about. I've never understood it, and now I do: it's exactly backwards from pass-by-reference, so it's exactly backwards from the languages with which I grew up. The Object (and derivative) variables are pointers, not references, and calling them references only confuses people who grew up writing C (as I did).
Even more oddly, it explains to me what I've never quite understood about Python's object model, because Python's object model is exactly the same. Reproducing the code in the article above in Python creates the same result:
class Foo(object): def __init__(self, x): self._result = x def _get_foo(self): return self._result def _set_foo(self, x): self._result = x result = property(_get_foo, _set_foo) def twid(y): y.result = 7 def twid2(y): y = Foo(7) r = Foo(4) print r.result # Should be 4 twid(r) print r.result # Should be 7 r = Foo(5) print r.result # Should be 5 twid2(r) print r.result # Still 5
This demonstrates that Python's code remains pass-by-value, with pythonic "references" in fact being pointers-to-objects. In the case of twid2, we change what the pointer y, which exists in the frame of the call twid2, points to and create a new object that is thrown away at the end of the call. The object to which y pointed when called is left unmolested.
This is important because it changes (it might even disrupt) the way I think about Python. For a long time, I've been using python calls out of habit, just knowing that sometimes objects are changed and sometimes they aren't. Now that the difference has been made clear to me, in language that I've understood since university, either I'm going to be struggling for a while incorporating this new understanding, or I'm going to be much more productive.