Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #76846
| From | Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Subject | Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) |
| Date | 2014-08-23 10:37 +0300 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <87zjev8xnc.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> (permalink) |
| References | <1bd05b41-ad00-4ce8-8678-de51205ebc3b@googlegroups.com> <mailman.13320.1408751900.18130.python-list@python.org> |
Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com>: > Please don't add multiline lambdas to Python. Agree. > Multiline lambdas give rise (in a big way) to the > computer-language-equivalent of run-on sentences. Lambdas are perfect in Scheme because they are idiomatic in it. They carry a visual meaning and flow nicely with the parentheses and the indentation. Multiline lambdas would look out of place in Python. Also, they don't buy you anything functionality-wise or expressivity-wise. Lambdas are visually absolutely horrible in Java (which doesn't need them) and C++ (which is in dire need of them). However, it would appear lambdas are all in the rage among programming languages, and I could think of far worse fads (XML, shudder). So it may be that Python will eventually have to give in to multiline lambdas because of the marketing pressure. Marko
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) icefapper@gmail.com - 2014-08-21 00:55 -0700
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-21 18:18 +1000
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) icefapper@gmail.com - 2014-08-21 01:59 -0700
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2014-08-21 19:05 +1000
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) icefapper@gmail.com - 2014-08-21 02:06 -0700
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) icefapper@gmail.com - 2014-08-21 02:27 -0700
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) icefapper@gmail.com - 2014-08-21 02:14 -0700
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-21 12:27 +0300
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) icefapper@gmail.com - 2014-08-21 02:30 -0700
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2014-08-22 15:15 +1000
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2014-08-21 06:07 -0400
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) Travis Griggs <travisgriggs@gmail.com> - 2014-08-22 13:05 -0700
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2014-08-23 19:20 +1000
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2014-08-22 16:48 -0700
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) Dan Stromberg <drsalists@gmail.com> - 2014-08-22 16:58 -0700
Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?) Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net> - 2014-08-23 10:37 +0300
csiph-web