On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 7:57 PM Brendan Barnwell <brenb...@brenbarn.net> wrote:
>
> On 2021-02-11 03:24, J. Pic wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Lambdas can be defined as such:
> >
> > w = lambda: [12]
> > x = lambda y: len(y)
> >
> > I'd like to propose the following:
> >
> > w = (): [12]
> > x = (y): len(y)
> >
> > Or even another contraction for when there are no arguments:
> >
> > w =: [12]
>
>         I don't see any need for this.  It's even more cryptic than "lambda"
> because at least lambda is a word you can look up.  This is just
> inscrutable punctuation.  Using different punctuation like "=>" doesn't
> help.

sigh. That argument again?

I just asked Google about "javascript =>" and got a bunch of perfectly
good results. Some said "arrow function", others have "=>" in the
title:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/24900875/whats-the-meaning-of-an-arrow-formed-from-equals-greater-than-in-javas

Yes, you CAN search for punctuation. Please can this argument die?

ChrisA
_______________________________________________
Python-ideas mailing list -- python-ideas@python.org
To unsubscribe send an email to python-ideas-le...@python.org
https://mail.python.org/mailman3/lists/python-ideas.python.org/
Message archived at 
https://mail.python.org/archives/list/python-ideas@python.org/message/DOP37STVDI2DXCYO3V4CNNHYHPVV4DNE/
Code of Conduct: http://python.org/psf/codeofconduct/

Reply via email to