At 11:14 AM 12/3/03 -0800, Guido van Rossum wrote: > > I think this is the key thing here. Lambda in its full form is very > > flexible and wide ranging - but 90% of the time, this flexibility > > isn't needed. And everything pays a cost for that flexibility, even > > when it's not used. > > > > Something that did that 90%, fast and efficiently, while leaving > > lambda for the few remaining cases where its flexibility is needed > > (possibly with an intent to deprecate it in the future) would probably > > be the best option. > >For the remaining 10%, you could just use 'def' if lambda didn't exist >at all. Some use cases could get quite inconvenient unless function decorators were also available, but if we're talking about 3.0, then I suppose they would be. :)
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4