Lemdro.id

8 points

4 months ago

I don’t think I would call this functional. Python is decidedly not at all functional - there’s no way to declare arbitrary functions inline, no chaining of map/filter etc.

But the static types are definitely welcome. I didn’t know about the type keyword. Apparently it makes it support forward references.

report

[ - ]

sus@programming.dev

4 points

4 months ago

like everything in python, to achieve functional you must first import functional

(not even a joke)

report

[ - ]

3 points

4 months ago

You’re still limited by lambda expressions though. And in general the language is still statement based, not expression based. You can’t do a = if foo then x else y type things (except for the one-off and backwards x if foo else y; they were so close!).

report

nxdefiant@startrek.website

[ - ]

1 point

4 months ago

“a = x if foo else y” is a perfectly cromulent statement!

report

[ - ]

2 points

4 months ago

It’s not. In functional languages there’s no special case like this. All if-elses are expressions. It’s far superior. For example how do you do this with Python’s if-else expression?

let x = if foo {
  let y = bar();
  baz();
  y
} else {
  z
}

report

nxdefiant@startrek.website

[ - ]

1 point

4 months ago

x = foo(y:=bar(), baz(), y) or z should work assuming foo bar and baz are functions being called?

if this is setting y to the effect of bar() + running baz after, then:

x = [bar(), baz()][0] or z

might work

and if you need y to be defined for later use:

x = [(y:=bar()), baz()][0] or z

but thats from memory, not sure if that will even run as written.

if I get to a real computer I'll try that with an actual if statement instead of a bastardized ternary.

report

[ - ]

2 points

4 months ago

foo isn’t a function, it’s a bool. But in any case, as you can see the answer is “with terrible hacks”. Python is not a functional language. It is imperative.

report