On 14/05/2015 02:40, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2015 04:07 am, zipher wrote:
No, you haven't understood, padawan. Lambda *is* the function, not it's
definition. Perhaps you will understand what I mean by that, perhaps you
won't. It's subtle.
Subtle like a kick to the head.
Mark, you seem to be labouring under the delusion that we don't agree with
you because we "boneheads" don't understand what you are talking about.
That's wrong. We understand what you are talking about. We don't agree with
you because half of your thesis is wrong and the other half is not even
wrong.
If you wish to change our minds, you're going to have to demonstrate
objective, verifiable facts and not just allude to how your ideas are too
subtle and clever for us.
From the very first drivel that he posted on python ideas just over two
years ago, he's shown that he's incapable of any logical thought
relating to computing, in just the same way that the RUE has never
posted anything logical about the FSR. Please can we stop feeding him.
--
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask
what you can do for our language.
Mark Lawrence
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
