Lennart Regebro wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 9:42 PM, Olivier Verdier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> repeats over and over again: lambda is just synctactic sugar for a function
>> definition. Here are suggestion for a new name for lambda, which will much
>> better describe what it is, namely a *function*.
>
> More specifically, an anonymous function. Best would be if you could
> just use def anonymously. And preferrably use normal return syntax:
>
> def(a,b): return a+b
>
> instead of
>
> lambda a, b: a+b
>
> would actually make it readable enough that I might start using it. ;)
Some might say that the ugliness of the current syntax is a point in its
favour ;)
The code will almost always become more readable and self-documenting if
the function is given a name.
Cheers,
Nick.
--
Nick Coghlan | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Brisbane, Australia
---------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.boredomandlaziness.org
_______________________________________________
Python-3000 mailing list
Python-3000@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-3000
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-3000/archive%40mail-archive.com
