A critic of Guido's blog on Python's lambda

[brian at sweetapp.com]

Patrick May wrote:
> aleaxit at yahoo.com (Alex Martelli) writes:
>> In my opinion (and that of several others), the best way for Python to
>> grow in this regard would be to _lose_ lambda altogether, since named
>> functions are preferable
>
>      Why?  I find the ability to create unnamed functions on the fly
> to be a significant benefit when coding in Common Lisp.

1. They don't add anything new to the language semantically i.e. you
   can always used a named function to accomplish the same task
   as an unnamed one.
2. Giving a function a name acts as documentation (and a named
   function is more likely to be explicitly documented than an unnamed
   one). This argument is pragmatic rather than theoretical.
3. It adds another construction to the language. 

Cheers,
Brian