On Wednesday 13 June 2007 4:04 am, Duncan Booth wrote:
> "Gabriel Genellina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > But you already have "multiline" lambdas right now in that sense, no
> > need to add anything. I think you were talking about lambdas *with*
> > statements inside.
> >
> > bin = lambda x:((x&8 and '*' or '_') +
> > (x&4 and '*' or '_') +
> > (x&2 and '*' or '_') +
> > (x&1 and '*' or '_'))
>
> Or in more recent versions of Python:
>
> bin = lambda x:(('*' if x&8 else '_') +
> ('*' if x&4 else '_') +
> ('*' if x&2 else '_') +
> ('*' if x&1 else '_'))
>
> but seriously, any example of lambda which simply assigns the function to a
> variable is flawed.
>
> I can sort of understand the people who object to a named function taking
> the logic 'out of line', but any expression which actually requires a
> multi-statement function to be embedded in the middle of it is already in
> danger of causing my brain to implode.
You're correct, my lambda function handles statements as well as multiple
expressions. That code, however, is bloody hideous. If that's what I had to
do to do multiline callbacks I'd always use def. Ew.
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
