"Alan Gauld" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > On Thu, 30 Dec 2004 23:28:46 +1000, Nick Coghlan > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> GvR has commented that he want to get rid of the lambda keyword for >> Python 3.0. >> Getting rid of lambda seems like a worthy goal, > > Can I ask what the objection to lambda is? > 1) Is it the syntax? > 2) Is it the limitation to a single expression? > 3) Is it the word itself?
Depending on the person, any of the 3. Plus add 4) The constant complaints re: 2) > I can sympathise with 1 and 2 but the 3rd seems strange since a > lambda is a well defined name for an anonymous function used in > several programming languages and originating in lambda calculus > in math. And that is why 'lambda' is wrong -- in Python, it is only an abbreviation for a restricted group of def statements, which is *not* its 'well defined' usage. Hence complaints re 2. If the syntax were def x: x + 2, etc, I suspect the complaints would be far fewer. For some new programmers, 'lambda' is as meaningless as elle*. All other Python keywords are English words or obvious abbreviations thereof. > So why not retain the name lambda but extend or change the syntax > to make it more capable rather than invent a wholly new syntax > for lambdas? That you suggest this illustrates, to me, what is wrong with the name ;-) Terry J. Reedy * The Spanish name for the letter 'll', pronounced el-yea, which comes after 'l' in their alphabet. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
