Under that definition, no passing by oranges does not have the same semantics as pass by reference.
This however changes the subject to the parameters of the functions. I have been talking about the object for which the parameter refers. Could we stick with talking about the concept I'm actually trying to get across rather than introducing a introducing a different one.
Since pass by oranges is not a term used in the Java spec, could you describe the pass by oranges semantics using spec terms?
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Let's try it.
"reference values (often just oranges)"
"All interactions with objects and array is by oranges, much like pointers in C."
Yep, I'd use it.
"Objects are pass by oranges and if C had them, it too would be pass by oranges."
Ok, and does pass-by-orange have pass-by-reference semantics, or does it have pass-by-value semantics? :)
Have we defined what we are discussing as passed and the definition of reference yet?
I've done so several times.
Here is the simplest requirement, again.
When passing by reference, modifying the parameter modifies the argument.
Under that definition, no passing by oranges does not have the same semantics as pass by reference.
This however changes the subject to the parameters of the functions. I have been talking about the object for which the parameter refers. Could we stick with talking about the concept I'm actually trying to get across rather than introducing a introducing a different one.
Since pass by oranges is not a term used in the Java spec, could you describe the pass by oranges semantics using spec terms?