[Python-Dev] Let's just *keep* lambda

Brett Cannon brett at python.org
Tue Feb 7 03:56:12 CET 2006

On 2/5/06, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> After so many attempts to come up with an alternative for lambda,
> perhaps we should admit defeat. I've not had the time to follow the
> most recent rounds, but I propose that we keep lambda, so as to stop
> wasting everybody's talent and time on an impossible quest.

I have been thinking about this, and I have to say I am a little
disappointed (-0 disappointed, not -1 disappointed).  I honestly
bought the argument for removing lambda.  And I think that a deferred
object would help with one of lambda's biggest uses and made its loss
totally reasonable.

But I know that everyone and their email client is against me on this
one, so I am not going to really try to tear into this.  But I do
think that lambda needs a renaming.  Speaking as someone who still
forgets that Python's lambda is not the same as those found in
functional languages, I would much rather have it named 'expr' or
'expression' or something that is more inline with its abilities then
with a name taken for CS historical reasons.  This ain't for father's
lambda and thus shouldn't be named so.

Then again, Guido did say he "should", not that he "did" admit defeat.  =)


More information about the Python-Dev mailing list