|
|
|
|
|
|
by ddejohn
332 days ago
|
|
|
> Obviously I know I could name this function and feed it in, but for one-off logic like this I feel a lambda is descriptive enough and I like that it can be done in-place. FWIW, you'd also have the benefit of being able to unit test your logic. |
|
|
I have done a lot of Haskell and F#, and I'm very familiar with the concept of "lifting", and yeah being able to individually test the components is nice, but even within Haskell it's not too uncommon to use a lambda if the logic doesn't really need to be reused or is only a couple lines.
If you have a huge function, or you think there's any chance of the logic being reused, of course don't use a lambda, use a named function. I'm just saying that sometimes stuff that has 2-4 lines is still not worthy of having a name.