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/