On Aug 18, 3:45 pm, "Rami Chowdhury" <rami.chowdh...@gmail.com> wrote: > Lambda expressions are, I believe, syntactically limited to a single > expression -- no statements, like 'print' is in Python 2.x. > > If you are strongly against just defining a function, you might have to > use a trick to get around it -- this page > (http://p-nand-q.com/python/stupid_lambda_tricks.html) has some > suggestions. > > On Tue, 18 Aug 2009 13:32:55 -0700, Robert Dailey <rcdai...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > On Aug 18, 3:31 pm, Duncan Booth <duncan.bo...@invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> Robert Dailey <rcdai...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Hello, > > >> > I want to simply wrap a function up into an object so it can be called > >> > with no parameters. The parameters that it would otherwise have taken > >> > are already filled in. Like so: > > >> > print1 = lambda: print( "Foobar" ) > >> > print1() > > >> > However, the above code fails with: > > >> > File "C:\IT\work\distro_test\distribute_radix.py", line 286 > >> > print1 = lambda: print( "Foobar" ) > >> > ^ > >> > SyntaxError: invalid syntax > > >> > How can I get this working? > > >> def print1(): > >> print "Foobar" > > >> It looks like in your version of Python "print" isn't a function. It > >> always > >> helps if you say the exact version you are using in your question as the > >> exact answer you need may vary. > > > I'm using Python 2.6. And using the legacy syntax in the lambda does > > not work either. I want to avoid using a def if possible. Thanks. > > -- > Rami Chowdhury > "Never attribute to malice that which can be attributed to stupidity" -- > Hanlon's Razor > 408-597-7068 (US) / 07875-841-046 (UK) / 0189-245544 (BD)
The example I gave earlier is a bit contrived, the real example fundamentally requires a lambda since I am actually passing in local variables into the functions the lambda is wrapping. Example: def MyFunction(): localVariable = 20 CreateTask( lambda: SomeOtherFunction( localVariable ) ) # CreateTask () executes the functor internally This is more or less like the real scenario I'm working with. There are other (more personal) reasons why I prefer to avoid 'def' in this case. I want to keep the functor as central to the code that needs it as possible to improve code readability. Thanks for the help everyone. I guess in Python 3.0 the print() function will not require the import from __future__ to work in this particular case? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
