In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, David Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >"Cameron Laird" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> Jibes against the lambda-clingers lead eventually to serious >> questions of style in regard to variable namespacing, >> lifespan, cleanup, and so on: >> >http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.python/browse_thread/thread/ad0e15cb6b8f2c32/ > > >#evaluate polynomial (coefs) at x using Horner's ruledef horner(coefs,x): >return reduce(lambda a1,a2: a1*x+a2,coefs)'Nuf said.Alan Isaac > >
No. That is, this follow-up does *not* say enough for me to have confidence of its intent. Leaving aside such formalities as the relation between "Alan Isaac" and "David Isaac", I *think* you're supporting a claim about the value of lambda with a specific example. Do I have that right? Are you saying that your definition of horner() would suffer greatly without lambda? -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
