On Mar 14, 5:30 pm, Nick Craig-Wood <n...@craig-wood.com> wrote: > BeniCherniavsky<beni.cherniav...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This proposal outrageously suggests a special syntax for in-line > > functions passed as keyword arguments:: > > > >>> sorted(range(9), key(n)=n%3) > > [0, 3, 6, 1, 4, 7, 2, 5, 8] > > > The claim is that such specialization hits a syntax sweet spot, and > > that this use case is frequent enough to contemplate eventually making > > it the only in-line function syntax. > > -1 from me. > > I think thatlambda/ inline functions should be discouraged as it > moves python away from, "there should be one-- and preferably only one > --obvious way to do it." IMHO Guido was right in his original impulse > to kill this second class way of making functions... > On a second thought, considering the LL(1) problem (which indicates a real problem for humans parsing it) and the "f(x)==" confusion, I agree.
Given that ``lambda`` usage is negligible compared to ``def`` (1.5% in python3.0 stdlib, ~3% counting most Python files in ubuntu repository), it should have been killed altogether per YAGNI and the "one way" principle. [Or is it just my "if you don't do it my way, don't do it at all" emotion talking? Don't know. But I did the statistics only after formulating the proposal, and I think now that 3% is definitely YAGNI.] -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
