Home Original page

[Python-Dev] Let's just *keep* lambda

Jiwon Seo seojiwon at gmail.com
Thu Feb 9 05:03:31 CET 2006 
On 2/8/06, Josiah Carlson <jcarlson at uci.edu> wrote:
>
> Jiwon Seo <seojiwon at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 2/8/06, Guido van Rossum <guido at python.org> wrote:
> > > On 2/8/06, Patrick Collison <patrick at collison.ie> wrote:
> > > > And to think that people thought that keeping "lambda", but changing
> > > > the name, would avoid all the heated discussion... :-)
> > >
> > > Note that I'm not participating in any attempts to "improve" lambda.
> >
> > Then, is there any chance anonymous function - or closure - is
> > supported in python 3.0 ? Or at least have a discussion about it?
> >
> > or is there already discussion about it (and closed)?
>
> Closures already exist in Python.
>
> >>> def foo(bar):
> ...     return lambda: bar + 1
> ...
> >>> a = foo(5)
> >>> a()
> 6

Not in that we don't have anonymous function (or closure) with
multiple statements. Also, current limited closure does not capture
programming context - or variables.

-Jiwon
More information about the Python-Dev mailing list