In article <60223680255.20040806012354 / soyabean.com.au>, Gavin Sinclair
<gsinclair / soyabean.com.au> wrote:

> That's context-dependent.  My impression is that Jesse thinks that
> code snippet in *any* context should evaluate to a lambda.

No, my argument was that having lambda + Proc + method + block seemed
awfully confusing and I didn't see the justifications for doing so. 

For example, some have said that blocks are there for performance
reasons which is a reasonable argument, but also seems like a bit of a
copout. It seems like it would be nicer to do these sorts of
optimzations automatically in the interpreter instead of cluttering up
the language with ways to indicate that the optimization is applicable.

Similarly return returning from a method within a block, but returning
from the closure in a lambda expression was touted as a benefit. But,
to me, it'd be cleaner to use one closure construct and reuse break
which already has the local escape semantics.

  -- Jesse