On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 7:11 AM, Marko Rauhamaa <ma...@pacujo.net> wrote:
> Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com>:
>> Your acceptance of closures is a perfect proof of how magic stops
>> looking like magic once you get accustomed to it.
>
> Actually, that's a very good observation. You should stick with a
> smallish kernel of primitives and derive the universe from them.
>
> Anyway, functions as first-class objects are truly foundational in all
> high-level programming. In Python programming, I mostly run into
> closures through inner classes (as in Java).
>
>> If you can accept closures because they just DTRT, why not accept a
>> much simpler and more obvious operation like putting a 'def' statement
>> in a loop?
>
> Nothing wrong or extraordinary with putting a def statement in a loop,
> but populating an object with fields (methods) in a loop is very rarely
> a good idea.
>
*headscratch*
So this is okay:
def f():
for i in range(5):
def g(): ...
But this isn't:
class C:
for i in range(5):
def m(self): ...
I've missed something here.
ChrisA
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
