Hi,
I tried python, and do like it. Easy to learn and read (at least for the
commonly used part), has a very large community so great doc and
contributions, and... the design is clean. I come from functional
programming languages, and I do like the proper static binding, the first
class functions
Well, thanks for the answers. I guess the fact is that python does not
want to be a functional programming language. This concept is quite large,
and since there is a proper notion of function with closure, I'd say
python is already quite a functional programming language. Even if
assignations and
> For instance, if assignment were done in an expression, the targets would
> have to be quoted to avoid having them evaluated. Or the assignment
> expression would have to be a 'special expression' that did not evaluate
> all its terms (like setq in some (just older?) lisps). In Python, that
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 06:57:19 -0700, Kay Schluehr wrote:
>> You can do stuff like this: lambda x: x and 2 or 3
>lambda x: {True:2,False:3}.get(bool(a))
I also think these solutions are just hacks, less efficient, less
readable. One shouldn't have to twist her mind to write such an easy idea.
_
>>> You can do stuff like this: lambda x: x and 2 or 3
>>lambda x: {True:2,False:3}.get(bool(a))
And by the way, I just noticed that this kind of hack is essentially
"pushing the control (statement) inside expressions"... People should
really admit that statements are expressions and stop twis
