Name binding
computer programming constraint allowing to bind a symbolic name to an object, valid in a well-defined scope, and to resolve it as a reference by a static or dynamic linking process
In computer programming, name binding is the association of a data or code entity with an identifier. An identifier bound to an entity is said to reference that entity. A machine language has no built-in notion of identifiers, but name-entity binding as a service and notation for the programmer is implemented by higher-level programming languages. Binding is intimately connected with scoping, as scope determines which names bind to which entities – at which locations in the program code (lexically) and in which one of the possible execution paths (temporally).
Use of an identifier id in a context that establishes a binding for id is called a binding (or defining) occurrence. In all other occurrences (e.g., in expressions, assignments, and subprogram calls), an identifier stands for what it is bound to; such occurrences are called applied occurrences.
Rebinding and mutation
Rebinding should not be confused with mutation or assignment. Rebinding is a change to the referencing identifier. Assignment is a change to (the referenced) variable. Mutation is a change to an entity in memory, possibly referenced by a variable or bound to an identifier.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “Name binding” is computer programming constraint allowing to bind a symbolic name to an object, valid in a well-defined scope, and to resolve it as a reference by a static or dynamic linking process. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Name, binding and computer, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “computer programming constraint allowing to bind a symbolic name to an object, valid in a well-defined scope, and to resolve it as a reference by a static or dynamic linking process” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jan 22, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q16928028. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Name binding”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Name binding primary sources, Name binding archive and Name research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Name binding”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Name binding” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.