[Python-Dev] Re: closure semantics
Alex Martelli
aleaxit at yahoo.com
Sun Oct 26 05:46:53 EST 2003
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list
Sun Oct 26 05:46:53 EST 2003
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: closure semantics
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Re: closure semantics
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Saturday 25 October 2003 20:05, David Eppstein wrote: ... > > One person here brought up (maybe David Eppstein) that they used this > > approach for coding up extensive algorithms that are functional in > > nature but have a lot of state referenced *during* the computation. ... > refactoring in general, but you convinced me that using an object to > represent shared state explicitly rather than doing it implicitly by > nested function scoping can be a good idea. Great testimony, David -- thanks!!! So, maybe, rather than going out of our way to facilitate coding very large and complicated closures, it might be better to keep focusing on _simple_, small closures as the intended, designed-for use case, and convince users of complicated closures that refactoring, as David has done, into OO terms, can indeed be preferable. Alex
- Previous message: [Python-Dev] Re: closure semantics
- Next message: [Python-Dev] Re: closure semantics
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list