
Jan. 20, 2016
4:44 a.m.
Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> writes:
But neither of these approaches would be good for lambdas. I'm okay with that -- lambda is a lightweight syntax, for lightweight needs. If your needs are great (doc strings, annotations, multiple statements) don't use lambda.
Yeah, but the fact that it's specifically part of C++'s lambda syntax suggests that it is a very common thing to need with a lambda, doesn't it? What about... lambda a, = b: [stuff with captured value b] ?