A replacement for lambda

Seth Nielson 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
> syntax.
> 
> Reinhold
> --
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
>



More information about the Python-list mailing list