On 5/2/06, Michael Chermside <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thomas Wouters writes: > > Lambda-lovers will probably jump all over me for suggesting > > this, and I doubt you'll go fir it, but what about just not > > allowing type annotations in lambda statements? They're > > neutered anyway. > > Speaking as a lambda user... +1... Great Idea Thomas! Lambdas are > for tiny anonymous functions... if you feel the need to specify the > types, why not go ahead and include a function name and perhaps > even a docstring -- use def instead.
Fine with me -- this is in fact the solution I was going to prototype. But in the long run I expect the difference is going to grate. Later... -- --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/) _______________________________________________ Python-3000 mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000 Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
