> > Not at all. This is still wide open. I happen to like generalized > > thunks because they remind me of Ruby blocks. But I realize there are > > more ways to skin this cat. Keep it coming! > > question, do you want thunks to be able to take arguments? is being > able to write something like this a target? > > iterate(list): (x): > print x Since we already have a for loop, I'm not sure what the use case would be, but it might be nice, yes. Feel free to call YAGNI on it until a better use case is found. But I imagine it would be easy enough to add on later in the design -- thunks can have free variables anyway, so providing a way to bind some of those ahead of time (and designate them as bindable) should be easy. --Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)
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