Nick Coghlan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Add in the fact that there are many, many Python programmers with > non-CS backgrounds, and the term 'lambda' sticks out like a sore thumb > from amongst Python's other English-based keywords. 'def' is probably > the second-most cryptic when you first encounter it, but it is a good > mnemonic for "define a function", so it's still easy to parse. "Lambda > is the term mathematicians use to refer to an anonymous function" is > nowhere near as grokkable ;)
Richard Feynman told a story about being on a review committee for some grade-school science textbooks. One of these book said something about "counting numbers" and it took him a while to figure out that this was a new term for what he'd been used to calling "integers". "Integer" is a math term but I think that if we need to use the concept of integers with someone unfamiliar with the term, it's best to just introduce the term and then use it, rather than make up new terminology like "counting numbers" even if those words sound more like conversational English. For the same reason I don't have any problem with "lambda", though it's not that big a deal. I also just can't believe that Pythonistas keep getting into these arguments over whether lambda is too confusing, while at the same time there's no such discussion over far more abstruse Python features like metaclasses. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
