On Sat, 3 May 2008, Brett Cannon wrote: > On Sat, May 3, 2008 at 1:03 AM, Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Some people write > > somename = lambda args: expression > > instead of the more obvious (to most people) and, dare I say, standard > > def somename(args): return expression > > > > The difference in the result (the only one I know of) is that the code and > > function objects get the generic name '<lambda>' instead of the more > > informative (in repr() output or tracebacks) 'somename'. I consider this a > > disadvantage. > > > > In the absence of any compensating advantages (other than the trivial > > saving of 3 chars), I consider the def form to be the proper Python style > > to the point I think it should be at least recommended for the stdlib in > > the Programming Recommendations section of PEP 8. > > > > There are currently uses of named lambdas at least in urllib2. This to me > > is a bad example for new Python programmers. > > > > What do our style mavens think? > > +1.
A superfluous +1 from me too, although I will mention that lists of lambdas have saved my butt more than a few times. -- Cheers, Leif _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
