On Thu, 29 Aug 2013 14:27:23 -0700, fp2161 wrote:
> Chris, call me a snob, but I resent using lambdas (aren't they usually
> considered odd/bad practice in python?)
Only among people who dislike functional programming idioms. Like GvR.
It is true that lambda functions are slightly restricted compared to
"normal" functions: they are limited to a single expression, and they all
share the same name '<lambda>', which if you have a lot of them can make
debugging annoying. So *overuse* of lambdas is considered bad form. But
for callbacks and such, they're fine.
It is frowned upon to *directly* bind a lambda to a name, as in this:
plusOne = lambda x: x+1
instead of:
def plusOne(x): return x+1
which is fair enough for production code, but at the interactive
interpreter (and throwaway code) I'll continue to feel free to assign
anonymous functions to names just as I assign anonymous ints and
anonymous lists to names :-)
I say "directly" because this of course is allowed:
funcs = [lambda x: x+1, lambda x: x*2, lambda x: x**3]
for func in func:
...
and *much* better than having to predefine plusOne, timesTwo, powerThree
functions.
--
Steven
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
