> c) the ability to break lexical scope
Well, I could argue that c) already exists
in the form of passing parameters in parens.
Of course, that doesn't feel like "breaking"
anything.
So instead I'll argue that the word "break"
is perhaps prejudicially perjorative.
I'd say, to steer away from being ppp:
c) introducing 'locals' or 'yours'
Where this terminology and perspective comes
from:
My view is that c) is about sharing vocabulary
between a caller and a callee to retain much
of the referential simplicity and brevity of
globals (and hence I think it's a pretty large
issue), and c) is also about the fact that this
can be done while omitting /all/ the dangers of
globals (short of dangers that also apply to
ordinary lexicals).
Elements of this shared vocabulary might be
called 'locals' or 'yours'.
--
ralph
