RetroSearch Browse

Sat May 3 01:11:36 CEST 2008 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-May/079071.html

+1 from me

On May 2, 2008, at 7:03 PM, "Terry Reedy" <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote:

> Some people write
>    somename = lambda args: expression
> instead of the more obvious (to most people) and, dare I say, standard
>    def somename(args): return expression
>
> The difference in the result (the only one I know of) is that the  
> code and
> function objects get the generic name '<lambda>' instead of the more
> informative (in repr() output or tracebacks) 'somename'.  I consider  
> this a
> disadvantage.
>
> In the absence of any compensating advantages (other than the trivial
> saving of 3 chars), I consider the def form to be the proper Python  
> style
> to the point I think it should be at least recommended for the  
> stdlib in
> the Programming Recommendations section of PEP 8.
>
> There are currently uses of named lambdas at least in urllib2.  This  
> to me
> is a bad example for new Python programmers.
>
> What do our style mavens think?
>
> Terry Jan Reedy
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/jnoller%40gmail.com

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2008-May/079071.html below:

[Python-Dev] PEP 8: Discourage named lambdas?