> > The function object then points into > method tables. You can't assign the name "f" to a different function > object, just attach different methods to it. The troubles seem to arise > from cached references to > orphaned method table entries, which are not completely dissociated from > the object named "f". > f(x)=x^2 >
so this definition associates the anonymous function with a name (and then it is not anoymous anymore?) However how do these method tables look like? In particular the name f is then associated to these methods and for some reason one does not want to be able to change f to refer to different methods? How would different mathod attaching look like? when I write f(x)=x^2 and then f(x)=x^3 the old method (is the method here the operation x^2 or x^3?) is still there and x^3 is just attached to it?!? is it possible to completely dissociate the old method (in this case as I understand it correctly it is x^2?) with the name f?
