PEP 312 - Making lambdas implicit worries me, surely it's just the name 'lambda' that is bad...

[Stephen Horne]

On 02 Mar 2003 23:16:53 +0000, Alexander Schmolck <a.schmolck at gmx.net>
wrote:

>Stephen Horne <intentionally at blank.co.uk> writes:
>
>> Actually, I've always thought that having separate 'def' and 'lambda'
>> syntaxes is a bit redundant. In lisp (and a few others) you'd use the
>> 'lambda' form to do both jobs, rather like (in current Python)
>> writing...
>> 
>>   sum = lambda a, b : a + b
>
>Not true, I think. Apart from scheme (which's lispness is often disputed in
>both lisp and scheme circles).

Wierd - I've hardly used scheme, but I have looked at it much more
recently than lisp (not used properly in more than a decade). Still, I
appologise for the confusion.

-- 
steve at ninereeds dot fsnet dot co dot uk