Would Anonymous Functions Help in Learning Programming/Python?

[Sean Tierney]

On 9/21/07, Sean Tierney <seanttierney at gmail.com> wrote:
> Just tell him that "functions are like all  other variables and can
> therefore be passed by other functions or returned by other functions.
> "
>
> If your friend understands variables and functions and he can't make
> the "leap" (and assuming you're right, of course) then your friend
> doesn't [might not] understand variables and functions [and he might need patience b/c this stuff is hard and not everyone is as smart as everyone else].
>
> Happy Friday.
>
> Sean [moderately overweight, self-admitted (very) slow learner.]
>
> On 9/21/07, Cristian <super.sgt.pepper at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sep 21, 3:44 pm, Ron Adam <r... at ronadam.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I think key may be to discuss names and name binding with your friend.  How
> > > a name is not the object it self, like a variable is in other languages.
> > > For example show him how an object can have more than one name.  And discus
> > > how names can be bound to nearly anything, including classes and functions.
> >
> > I could discuss name binding but it would be great if Python said this
> > itself. After all, you can even bind a module with the foo = bar
> > syntax by using __import__ function. If function definitions followed
> > the same pattern, I think a beginner would subconsciously (maybe even
> > consciously) realize that function names are just like everything
> > else. Actually, this would be helpful for many people. If you come
> > from a language like Java you're used to thinking of attributes and
> > methods as living in different namespaces. I think a new syntax will
> > encourage seasoned programmers think in a more Pythonic way.
> >
> > Python has done a very good job in easing people into programming. My
> > friend doesn't come to me very often because the syntax is clear and
> > simple and the builtin datatypes allow you to do so much. My goal is
> > that I would never have to explain to him about name binding; that
> > he'd pick it up by learning the language on his own. He's learned
> > lists, dictionaries and even some OOP without me. I don't think name
> > binding would be a stretch.
> >
> > > You could also discus factory functions with him.  Once he gets that a
> > > function can return another function, then it won't be so much of a leap
> > > for a function to take a function as an argument.
> >
> > I think this isn't the most intuitive way of approaching first order
> > functions. It's true that if a function can return another function
> > then a function must be first order (i.e., it's just like any other
> > variable), but that seems almost backwards to me. I think it would
> > make more sense to have beginners _know_ that functions are like all
>
> > other variables and can therefore be passed by other functions or
> > returned by other functions. That I think would be better accomplished
> > if they define functions the same way you would define other variables
> > that you know can be passed and returned.
> >
> >
> > --
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
> >
>
>
> --
> Sean Tierney
>


-- 
Sean Tierney