Patrick May wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alex Martelli) writes: >> In my opinion (and that of several others), the best way for Python to >> grow in this regard would be to _lose_ lambda altogether, since named >> functions are preferable > > Why? I find the ability to create unnamed functions on the fly > to be a significant benefit when coding in Common Lisp.
1. They don't add anything new to the language semantically i.e. you can always used a named function to accomplish the same task as an unnamed one. 2. Giving a function a name acts as documentation (and a named function is more likely to be explicitly documented than an unnamed one). This argument is pragmatic rather than theoretical. 3. It adds another construction to the language. Cheers, Brian -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
