Shorter lambdas about lambda.r HOT 4 OPEN

Hi, thanks for the suggestion, but I'm not quite sure what you're trying to accomplish. If you want an inline lambda expression, why wouldn't you simply use something like function(x) x + 5? I'm a bit bleary-eyed from putting together my discrete math course, so perhaps I'm missing something obvious.

from lambda.r.

Simply because I wanted something shorter :) I know it's silly, but I am so
used to Haskell, where you would do

folder + 0 [1 2 3] #-> 6

or Clojure where you can do

(map #(% * 2) [1 2 3]) #-> [2 4 6]

or Apple's new Swift where you can do

[1,2,3,4].map {$0 * 2}

After that, lapply(c(1,2,3), function(x) x * 2) seems too verbose :)

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Brian Lee Yung Rowe <
[email protected]> wrote:

Hi, thanks for the suggestion, but I'm not quite sure what you're trying
to accomplish. If you want an inline lambda expression, why wouldn't you
simply use something like function(x) x + 5? I'm a bit bleary-eyed from
putting together my discrete math course, so perhaps I'm missing something
obvious.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#20 (comment).

http://reganmian.net/blog -- Random Stuff that Matters

from lambda.r.

Updated with some examples

> filter(">2", c(1,2,3,4))
[1] 3 4

> reduce("%+%2", 0, c(1,2,3))
[1] 6

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Stian Håklev [email protected] wrote:

Simply because I wanted something shorter :) I know it's silly, but I am
so used to Haskell, where you would do

folder + 0 [1 2 3] #-> 6

or Clojure where you can do

(map #(% * 2) [1 2 3]) #-> [2 4 6]

or Apple's new Swift where you can do

[1,2,3,4].map {$0 * 2}

After that, lapply(c(1,2,3), function(x) x * 2) seems too verbose :)

On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 3:27 PM, Brian Lee Yung Rowe <
[email protected]> wrote:

Hi, thanks for the suggestion, but I'm not quite sure what you're trying
to accomplish. If you want an inline lambda expression, why wouldn't you
simply use something like function(x) x + 5? I'm a bit bleary-eyed from
putting together my discrete math course, so perhaps I'm missing something
obvious.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#20 (comment).

http://reganmian.net/blog -- Random Stuff that Matters

http://reganmian.net/blog -- Random Stuff that Matters

from lambda.r.

Ah okay :) I've thought about how to shorten lambdas as well, but decided it wasn't worth it unless I added some of the other features of lambda.r (e.g. pattern matching) to it. Funny, as I've already been accused of adding "syntactic alum" to R because of lambda.r syntax, so I'm not sure whether this would improve the situation or not. There's probably a way to do it with lazy evaluation and deparsing to make it cleaner, though I'd have to think about what type of interface would make sense.

from lambda.r.