> The lambda syntax (\(x) -> x + 1) is similar to Haskell's (\x -> x + 1).
The proposed lambda syntax for R is `\(x) x+1` so `\` will just be shorthand for `function`.
The proposed lambda syntax for R is `\(x) x+1` so `\` will just be shorthand for `function`.
function(x) {x + 1}
\(x) x + 1
Tierney mentioned that tidyverse found function(x) too verbose and uses fomula syntax. Given how tidyverse often uses the "y ~ x" formula notation, this might actually be picking up deficiencies in R's macro system rather than in the function notation and the problem got misdagnosed.
\(x) x+1
function(x) x+1
It will also produce shorter, and clearer, lines of code.
What I don’t understand is the reference to “formula syntax”. What is the issue and how does the new syntax solve it?
And all the rest of the comment I wouldn't have typed except I'm already replying, since I know this is one of those two-types-of-people-who-don't-change-opinions situations. But...
> not only saves a few keystrokes.
R is secretly a lisp. People can define whatever they want to be whatever they want. Pipes were already implemented in a library (try doing that in Python). Make your own library or bind \ to a keyboard macro or something if your fingers are on the point of crumbling under the stress of those 7 keystrokes.
Defaults using real words to describe things is good. The function to create a function being function() is eminently reasonable. \() is meaningless and about as useful as a one-word variable
> It will also produce shorter, and clearer, lines of code.
Opinons very much divide. Code length is only a proxy for load on a reader's short term memory which is what matters. \ is going to put more burden on someone if they aren't very familiar with R. Most R coders are not full time programmers and not very good at R.
[0] https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/base/versions/3.6.2/... [1] https://www.rdocumentation.org/packages/stats/versions/3.6.2... [2] http://www.cookbook-r.com/Graphs/Facets_(ggplot2)/
‘\(x) x + 1’ is parsed as ‘function(x) x + 1’
Note that the existing “f <- function(...) ...” syntax is not being removed. But I write a lot of code like
state.range <- apply(state.x77, 2, function(x) c(min(x), median(x), max(x)))
state.range <- apply(state.x77, 2, \(x) c(min(x), median(x), max(x)))