[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       python-list
Subject:    Re: map/filter/reduce/lambda opinions and background unscientific
From:       Bruno Desthuilliers <bdesth.quelquechose () free ! quelquepart ! fr>
Date:       2005-07-06 20:45:59
Message-ID: 42cc41c5$0$23671$636a15ce () news ! free ! fr
[Download RAW message or body]

Tom Anderson a écrit :
> Comrades,
> 
> During our current discussion of the fate of functional constructs in 
> python, someone brought up Guido's bull on the matter:
> 
> http://www.artima.com/weblogs/viewpost.jsp?thread=98196
> 
> He says he's going to dispose of map, filter, reduce and lambda. He's 
> going to give us product, any and all, though, which is nice of him.
> 
> What really struck me, though, is the last line of the abstract:
> 
> "I expect tons of disagreement in the feedback, all from 
> ex-Lisp-or-Scheme folks. :-)"
> 
> I disagree strongly with Guido's proposals, and i am not an ex-Lisp, 
> -Scheme or -any-other-functional-language programmer; my only other real 
> language is Java. I wonder if i'm an outlier.
> 
> So, if you're a pythonista who loves map and lambda, and disagrees with 
> Guido, what's your background? Functional or not?
> 

I discovered FP with David Mertz's papers about FP in Python. I had 
never read nor write a line of lisp, scheme, haskell, caml etc before. 
And I'd certainly start thinking of choosing another MYFL if anonymous 
functions where to disappear from Python. Note that I said "anonymous 
functions", not "lambda". Concerning map, filter, reduce etc, these 
functions can live in a separate module, and this wouldn't bother me. 
But anonymous functions are part of the language syntax, so there is no 
work-around.

My 2 (euro) cents
-- 
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]