On 2021-10-02 08:59, Abdulla Al Kathiri wrote:
Let’s say I want to write a lambda function with no arguments that’s connected to a
button in GUI coding, will blabla.connect(()=>print(“clicked”)) be used or will
blabla.connect(=>print(“clicked”)) be used?
In the case of C#, the parentheses are optional if there's only one
parameter, so:
() => ...
(x) => ... or x => ...
(x, y) => ...
(x, y, z) => ...
etc.
> On 30 Sep 2021, at 7:53 PM, MRAB <pyt...@mrabarnett.plus.com> wrote:
>
> On 2021-09-30 07:21, Chris Angelico wrote:
>>> On Thu, Sep 30, 2021 at 4:19 PM Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 29, 2021 at 02:09:03PM -0700, Guido van Rossum wrote:
>>> > Over in typing-sig we're considering a new syntax for callable *types*,
>>> > which would look like (int, int, str) -> float. A matching syntax for
>>> > lambda would use a different arrow, e.g. (x, y, z) => x+y+z.
>>>
>>> I like arrow operators :-)
>>>
>>> But I fear that it will be too easy to misread `=>` as greater than or
>>> equal to, especially when skimming code.
>>>
>>> Assuming that they need to be different arrows, how do you feel about
>>> `->` for types and annotations, and `-->` for lambdas? Or `->>`?
>>>
>> JavaScript uses => for functions, and the confusion with ">=" doesn't
>> seem to be a major problem with it.
> C# also uses "=>".
>
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/UYGJOUJJGG72O3TRAK5JB7JX2AO2YQGF/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/
