Why would you want to downvote somebody trying to help you?
In any case, I think I see your problem. You are not the sole user of Python language. There are features that other people like (such as using '*' in unpacking), and so features you like are weighted against their use cases, and a reasonable compromise is made.
And frankly, I think if you like to use lambdas that much, you really want to program in a language where everything is an expression, such as Lisp or Haskell.
> In any case, I think I see your problem. You are not the sole user of Python language.
I'm glad I'm not. Otherwise I probably wouldn't be using it either. Not sure how that is my "problem".
> There are features that other people like (such as using [asterisk] in unpacking), and so features you like are weighted against their use cases, and a reasonable compromise is made.
I like that [asterisk] syntax too.
> And frankly, I think if you like to use lambdas that much, you really want to program in a language where everything is an expression, such as Lisp or Haskell.
Or I could just keep using Python 2.7 which works just fine, and not move to version 3 where I'm not welcome.
It's your problem in e.g. where you want list returned by default where Python 3 returns an iterator by default. Why is that useful for many people was already explained.
That's why I used the word "trying". Maybe you should read more carefully before you want to accuse others from misreading something. ;-)
I think it's unfair to say that I misread his comment - he doesn't explicitly mention he is aware of the workaround I outlined for the functions, and that he is bothered with lack of tuple unpacking in lambda expressions only, not in ordinary functions.
Regardless, I still think it's quite impolite to downvote somebody who wants to help you and misunderstands you, if they are not e.g. factually incorrect. If you don't actually tell me where I am wrong, I cannot improve my answer. Also, this is not Stackoverflow, where that could be marginally acceptable (I am very strongly against downvoting without explanation).
> Regardless, I still think it's quite impolite to downvote somebody who wants to help you and misunderstands you
Well, I don't consider it a "misunderstanding" when there are literally just 2 things to note in my comment that you're replying to ("lambda" and "tuple unpacking") and you still somehow miss 1 of them. I think it totally deserves a downvote, because it makes me look stupid when you present a reasonable solution to a non-problem and make readers assume I was saying something other than I was, and on top of that I have to waste some 5-10 minutes of my time replying. That's not something I appreciate.
That said, like I said, I never actually downvoted that comment (because I obviously couldn't). So you don't need to worry about the internet points.
If you weren't busy taking things so personally, you could note that I already hinted in my comment on why I made it - I missed the feature of unpacking within function arguments myself at first too, until I realized that unpacking within the body isn't really less readable. (And please - do not waste time replying.)
I admit I don't use lambdas that much, since generator expressions (which is like Python 2.3) they aren't really needed too frequently. And in most cases you're better off using function anyway, because in Python statements are not expressions, as I already also stated. For example, I use print() for debugging frequently and this is tough to insert into lambda. (And even in Haskell I prefer to name subexpressions to lambda syntax.)
> That said, like I said, I never actually downvoted that comment (because I obviously couldn't). So you don't need to worry about the internet points.
I am not worried about internet points (I actually got about 80 of them on this discussion alone, which is frankly ridiculously too much, and in practice, I find that comments I personally find to be the most insightful only rarely get most points), I am just really annoyed when somebody downvotes my comments without any explanation, because I am a very curious person and in most cases it's just a honest misunderstanding, which could be cleared up with, I don't know, actual communication?
And at least two or three other people actually downvoted my original comment, so I would like to use this opportunity to invite them to come forward with an explanation what they found so wrong about it.
In any case, I think I see your problem. You are not the sole user of Python language. There are features that other people like (such as using '*' in unpacking), and so features you like are weighted against their use cases, and a reasonable compromise is made.
And frankly, I think if you like to use lambdas that much, you really want to program in a language where everything is an expression, such as Lisp or Haskell.