On Thu, Mar 27, 2008 at 4:25 AM, Giovanni Bajo email@example.com wrote:
inspired by Greg's post about ideas on making the lambda syntax more concise, like:
x,y => x+y
I was wondering if using unnamed arguments had already been debated. Something like:
where basically you're declaring implicitally declaring that your lambda takes two arguments. You wouldn't be able to call them through keyword arguments, nor to accept a variable number of arguments (nor to accept more arguments than they are actually used), but wouldn't it cover most use cases and be really compact?
Two reasons for being -1:
One is it's just plain ugly to me.
Two, why break from how functions and methods work to save a few keystrokes? Explicit is better than implicit.