Anonymous function syntax

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 9/22/11 4:13 PM, dsimcha wrote:
> I'd much rather see the bugs in the current lambda syntax get fixed (e.g.
> http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=4724) rather than spend more time
> bikeshedding.

That's not an either-or choice, and of course improving current lambdas 
(btw that's not a purely syntactic bug) would improve the rewrites as well.

What I noticed lately is that people simply appreciate terse lambdas a 
whole lot. They hate C++ lambdas because you need to mention types, 
dislike Java's poor solution to lambdas to the extent the language had 
to add a feature just for them (which is subject to further controversy) 
and so on. I think current D is no slouch for lambda expressions, and 
function attribute deduction adds great power to lambdas, but further 
simplifying lambdas may mark a sensible improvement in their usability.


Andrei