on 30.07.2005 10:20 Paolino said the following: > why (x**2 with(x))<(x**3 with(x)) is not taken in consideration? > > If 'with' must be there (and substitue 'lambda:') then at least the > syntax is clear.IMO Ruby syntax is also clear. >
I am sorry if this has already been proposed (I am sure it has). Why not substitue python-lambdas with degenerated generator expressions:: (lambda x: func(x)) == (func(x) for x) i.e. a one time callable generator expression (missing the `in` part). The arguments get passed into the generator, I am sure that can be combined with the PEP about passing args and Exceptions into a generator. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
