On 2/8/06, Josiah Carlson <jcarlson at uci.edu> wrote: > > Jiwon Seo <seojiwon at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 2/8/06, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote: > > > On 2/8/06, Patrick Collison <patrick at collison.ie> wrote: > > > > And to think that people thought that keeping "lambda", but changing > > > > the name, would avoid all the heated discussion... :-) > > > > > > Note that I'm not participating in any attempts to "improve" lambda. > > > > Then, is there any chance anonymous function - or closure - is > > supported in python 3.0 ? Or at least have a discussion about it? > > > > or is there already discussion about it (and closed)? > > Closures already exist in Python. > > >>> def foo(bar): > ... return lambda: bar + 1 > ... > >>> a = foo(5) > >>> a() > 6 Not in that we don't have anonymous function (or closure) with multiple statements. Also, current limited closure does not capture programming context - or variables. -Jiwon
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