On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 9:26 AM, Bruce Leban <bruce@leapyear.org> wrote:

On Mar 3, 2014, at 22:02, David Townshend <aquavitae69@gmail.com> wrote:

What about a new code literal object, e.g.

    thunk = c'x + 3'

This already exists. 

    thunk = lambda: x + 3

Your original post in this thread wanted to allow functions to magically capture their parameters as code (~ call by name) and it's been pointed out that that is incompatible with the way the language is designed and function calls are implemented. Yes, there are languages where the called function gets to tell the caller how to package arguments but Python isn't one of them.

Now you seem to have veered in a different direction. I have no idea what problem you are trying to solve.

This is my first post in this thread - I don't recall who the OP was, but it wasn't me.