# Julia's assignment behavior differs from Fortran?

**URL:** <https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julias-assignment-behavior-differs-from-fortran/50389>\
**Category:** General Usage\
**Tags:** fortran\
**Created:** [November 18, 2020, 1:24pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julias-assignment-behavior-differs-from-fortran/50389 "2020-11-18T13:24:15Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 12

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Henrique\_Becker](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/julialang/user_avatar/discourse.julialang.org/henrique_becker/32/15443_2.png) [@Henrique\_Becker](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Henrique_Becker)\
**Post date:** [November 18, 2020, 2:48pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julias-assignment-behavior-differs-from-fortran/50389/12 "2020-11-18T14:48:49Z")

</div>

> [@CosmoProf](#):
>
> so that if 500 lines later, you update the value of `y` , then the value of `x` gets silently updated too?? I can’t believe that.

This is exactly what would have happened with the equivalent Python, Java, or C code (for the old pointer arrays).

> [@CosmoProf](#):
>
> LeandroM, I’m flabbergasted that this program you wrote produces that result. It’s like there’s no sense of causality. So `x = y` creates some kind of life-long bond between the variables (within the function),

You notice you say there is no link of causality and then you are able to find the link immediately, no?

Please see my post why [_you should look at variables as labels not boxes_](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/is-it-appropriate-to-say-a-variable-is-a-label-or-box/46068/19).

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/julias-assignment-behavior-differs-from-fortran/50389)._