I sing the praises of lambda, my friend and savior!

[Steven Bethard]

Jeff Shannon <jeff <at> ccvcorp.com> writes:

> Lambdas are hard to read, because they're significantly different, 
> syntactically, from any other construct in the language

Yes, they are different (summarizing your points):
* no parens around argument list
* returns a value without the return statement
* contains a single expression, not a sequence of statements

Of course, comparing something like the new decorator syntax to the older 
equivalent will also point out a construct that's "significantly different, 
syntactically, from any other construct in the language":

@d1
@d2
def f():
    pass

as opposed to

def f():
    pass
f = d1(d2(f))

Some points (in parallel with yours, as much as possible):
* no parens, but functions are called
* rebinds a name without an assignment statement[1]
* appear as expressions, but act like statements
* appear before a def, but are applied after

I'd contend that lambda syntax is much more in-line with the rest of Python 
than decorator syntax.  Not that I'm suggesting we get rid of decorator 
syntax -- I've already found it useful on a number of occasions.  I just 
wanted to point out that, all things considered, lambdas are probably more 
consistent with Python than decorators are.

Steve

[1] Actually, I believe the function is not bound to a name until after the 
decorators are applied, but I don't think it's completely unreasonable to talk 
of this as a name rebinding.