Of what use is 'lambda'???
ge at nowhere.none
Tue Sep 19 16:43:01 CEST 2000
In article <8q6i9q$7m5$1 at panix6.panix.com>, Aahz Maruch wrote:
>>The lambda definition is limited to only one expression, and everything
>>you do with lambda, can also be done with plain functions.
>Yup. Lambda is worthless. Don't use it.
>(I'm half-joking, but only half-joking. Try learning Lisp or Haskell,
>and then lambdas will probably make more sense.)
Having "lambda" and "def" as seperate (and slightly different)
ways to create a function adds to the confusion.
I think the best way of explaining lambda would be by saying that
foo = lambda x,y,z: expression-involving-x,y,z
The gotcha is that the body of a lambda can't be a statement,
only an expression. But for that difference, lambda would be
easier to explain.
Grant Edwards grante Yow! RELATIVES!!
More information about the Python-list