Re: lambda() naming
| From: | Andi Gutmans | Date: | Sun, 04 Jun 2000 03:59:58 +0000 |
| Subject: | Re: lambda() naming | ||
| References: | 1 2 3 | Groups: | php.dev |
| Request: | Send a blank email to php-dev+get-20154@lists.php.net to get a copy of this message | ||
At 06:18 PM 6/3/00 -0500, Andrei Zmievski wrote:
On Sun, 04 Jun 2000, Stanislav Malyshev wrote: In fact, I don't believe in such thing as "intuitive function name". That's almost as "intuitive machine code". Function name is an axiom, you look it on the manual and learn it. You will do it anyway to know arguments, BTW :) And lambda is much shorter to type than anonymous_function. :) Yes, lambda() has a well-defined meaning in computer science, why should we dumb it down?As I didn't learn LISP during my computer science major but ML instead (and no one learns Python at university as far as I know), I never heard of lambda(). And I am sure most PHP users have not heard of lambda() as most of them aren't computer science majors at all. I am more against having two names for this lambda() function than actually calling it lambda(). But I do think it is a better idea to call it a more meaningful (IMO) name. Andi --- Andi Gutmans <andi@zend.com> http://www.zend.com/