On 2/5/06, Guido van Rossum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > After so many attempts to come up with an alternative for lambda, > perhaps we should admit defeat. I've not had the time to follow the > most recent rounds, but I propose that we keep lambda, so as to stop > wasting everybody's talent and time on an impossible quest.
I have been thinking about this, and I have to say I am a little disappointed (-0 disappointed, not -1 disappointed). I honestly bought the argument for removing lambda. And I think that a deferred object would help with one of lambda's biggest uses and made its loss totally reasonable. But I know that everyone and their email client is against me on this one, so I am not going to really try to tear into this. But I do think that lambda needs a renaming. Speaking as someone who still forgets that Python's lambda is not the same as those found in functional languages, I would much rather have it named 'expr' or 'expression' or something that is more inline with its abilities then with a name taken for CS historical reasons. This ain't for father's lambda and thus shouldn't be named so. Then again, Guido did say he "should", not that he "did" admit defeat. =) -Brett _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
