A replacement for lambda
sethjn at gmail.com
Sat Jul 30 20:01:18 CEST 2005
I understand that there are a number of people who wish to remove
lambda entirely from the language. Nevertheless, I find it a useful
and powerful tool in actual development.
Any replacement must support the following: *delayed evaluation*.
I need a convenient (def is not always convenient) way of saying,
"don't do this now". That is why I use lambda.
-- Seth Nielson
On 7/30/05, Reinhold Birkenfeld <reinhold-birkenfeld-nospam at wolke7.net> wrote:
> Stefan Rank wrote:
> > on 30.07.2005 10:20 Paolino said the following:
> >> why (x**2 with(x))<(x**3 with(x)) is not taken in consideration?
> >> If 'with' must be there (and substitue 'lambda:') then at least the
> >> syntax is clear.IMO Ruby syntax is also clear.
> > I am sorry if this has already been proposed (I am sure it has).
> > Why not substitue python-lambdas with degenerated generator expressions::
> > (lambda x: func(x)) == (func(x) for x)
> > i.e. a one time callable generator expression (missing the `in` part).
> > The arguments get passed into the generator, I am sure that can be
> > combined with the PEP about passing args and Exceptions into a generator.
> It's hard to spot, and it's too different to a genexp to have such a similar
More information about the Python-list