RetroSearch Browse

Fri Sep 20 00:24:22 CEST 2013 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-September/128803.html

Nice idea, BUT...

Not sure how a parser addition that supports it would go. Imagine this: if
you did a one-line function:

def test(x): print(x)

Python could interpret it two ways:

`def` `name` `lparen` `name` `rparen` `colon`...

OR, it could see it as a lambda-like thingamajig and throw a syntax error.
And, if someone accidentally wrote:

def (x): print(x)

Python should throw a syntax error. But it won't. And it'll take the person
a tad bit to realize he forgot the function name. Whoops.

And, it just would be odd in general.

On Thu, Sep 19, 2013 at 3:54 PM, Ben Gift <benhgift at gmail.com> wrote:

> I think the lambda keyword is difficult to understand for many people. It
> would be more pythonic to use an empty def call instead.
>
> For instance this:
>
>     words.sort(key = lambda x: x[2])
>
> could look like this:
>
>     words.sort(key = def (x): x[2])
>
> It's obvious and explicit that we're creating an unnamed, anonymous
> function this way.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Python-Dev mailing list
> Python-Dev at python.org
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
> Unsubscribe:
> https://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/rymg19%40gmail.com
>
>

-- 
Ryan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/attachments/20130919/c3382176/attachment.html>

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

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-September/128803.html below:

[Python-Dev] Use an empty def as a lambda