Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?)

Path	csiph.com!v102.xanadu-bbs.net!xanadu-bbs.net!feeder.erje.net!eu.feeder.erje.net!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Marko Rauhamaa <marko@pacujo.net>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Subject	Re: proposed syntax for multiline anony-functions (hopefully?)
Date	Sat, 23 Aug 2014 10:37:11 +0300
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	26
Message-ID	<87zjev8xnc.fsf@elektro.pacujo.net> (permalink)
References	<1bd05b41-ad00-4ce8-8678-de51205ebc3b@googlegroups.com> <mailman.13320.1408751900.18130.python-list@python.org>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info	mx05.eternal-september.org; posting-host="ff5cf27ef3d5b31f034d3b72bdc27a41"; logging-data="3945"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/+TDsCCgPV2JpoewWVmhi3"
User-Agent	Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock	sha1:7ti77bJ8xWLdrA8a8pd+3Vs2tIg= sha1:e2OPbQ/LQwhBrv2QFHUe7duFNJg=
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.python:76846

Show key headers only | View raw

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

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