From 5f8067df42e41aaf3ab7c77742e8193a0a62cc2f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Antoine Rozo Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2020 14:39:29 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Fix explanation for 6th example of "Needles in a Haystack" --- README.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/README.md b/README.md index db1fe37..d3c8bde 100644 --- a/README.md +++ b/README.md @@ -2579,7 +2579,7 @@ def similar_recursive_func(a): * As for the fifth snippet, most methods that modify the items of sequence/mapping objects like `list.append`, `dict.update`, `list.sort`, etc. modify the objects in-place and return `None`. The rationale behind this is to improve performance by avoiding making a copy of the object if the operation can be done in-place (Referred from [here](http://docs.python.org/2/faq/design.html#why-doesn-t-list-sort-return-the-sorted-list)). -* Last one should be fairly obvious, passing mutable object (like `list` ) results in a call by reference, whereas an immutable object (like `int`) results in a call by value. +* Last one should be fairly obvious, mutable object (like `list`) can be altered in the function, and the reassignation of an immutable (`a -= 1`) is not an alteration of the value. * Being aware of these nitpicks can save you hours of debugging effort in the long run.