Python syntax in Lisp and Scheme

[Terry Reedy]

"Paul Foley" <see at below.invalid> wrote in message
news:m2zng4w05m.fsf at mycroft.actrix.gen.nz...
> True enough.  Naming things is a pain though.  Imagine if you
couldn't
> use numbers without naming them: e.g., if instead of 2 + 3 you had
to
> do something like
>
>   two = 2
>   three = 3
>   two + three

For float constants in a language (such as Fortran) with multiple
float types (of different precisions), naming as part of a declaration
of precision is (or at least has been) a standard practice in some
circles.  It makes it easy to change the precision used throughout a
program.

> [Mind you, Python's lambda is next to useless anyway]

It is quite useful for its designed purpose, which is to abbreviate
and place inline short one-use function definitions of the following
pattern: def _(*params): return <expression using params>.

However, making the keyword 'lambda' instead of something like 'func'
was a mistake for at least two reasons:
1) it confuses those with no knowledge of lambda calculus and for whom
it is an strange, arbitrary term, possibly conjuring images of little
sheep, rather than being familar and mnemonic;
2) it raises unrealistic expectations in who know of 'lambda' as an
anonymous version of 'defun' (or whatever), leading them to make
statements such as the above.

Terry J. Reedy