Re: map/filter/reduce/lambda opinions and background unscientific mini-survey

Tom Anderson wrote:
> So, if you're a pythonista who loves map and lambda, and disagrees with
> Guido, what's your background? Functional or not?

I avoid map sometimes, because I find its syntax less readable
than list (and expression) comprehensions. But occasionally it
is the most readable way to do something, and I wouldn't want to lose
it.

Lambda serves a very specific purpose: declaring small, in-place
functions which are no bigger than a single expression. I do this often
enough that I DO want special syntax for it. But I'll admit that I
wish "lambda" were about 5 or 6 characters shorter and didn't have such
an obscure name.

I disagree (and I've mentioned it before) with Guido's plan to remove
these eventually. I'm perfectly satisfied with the alternate plan to
move the functions like map to a module (perhaps named "functional").
(That doesn't help with lambda, though since it requires syntactical
support.)

And my background is definitely NOT functional: I started with Basic,
then learned Pascal well, then _lots_ of other languages (including
Lisp) to an academic level. I've been using Java and Python heavily
now for about 8 or 9 years. I _DO_ however feel quite comfortable
using a functional approach *for certain problems*.

-- Michael Chermside

.

Relevant Pages