Hacker News Reader

Comment by Ivoah | Hacker News Reader

> better lambda syntax

What do you mean by better lambda syntax? Is there something that you feel isn't adequate in the current syntax?

It's a bit verbose. A lambda with a single one letter param takes ten characters to write: `lambda x: `. In JS, it's 5: `x => `. Ruby blocks take sevenish: `{|x| }`. Six in haskell.

How did you get six for Haskell? I get five if you require a space at the end

    \x->

I was counting a space after the x.

Also, still no support for multi-line lambdas is there?

Multi-line lambdas will never happen. Lambdas are expressions. "Multi-line" means statements. There is no sane way you could embed statements into an expression with whitespace-based block syntax.

Fine, not technically lambdas, but still: function bodies declared inline in function calls. This provides great flexibility in higher-order functions.

> There is no sane way you could embed statements into an expression with whitespace-based block syntax.

Ruby does it. Of course, Ruby has a limitation that a function call may only have one "block", but still - Ruby blocks are statements embedded into an expression in a whitespace-based syntax.

Ruby has explicit syntax to end groups of statements. Python is equally powerful when it comes to higher-order functions; it just enforces a flatter, more explicit style.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com