From: Phil Hagelberg <phil@...>
Date: 2008-05-13T01:12:16+09:00
Subject: Re: lambda, ->, haskell, and so on

Nathan Weizenbaum <nex342@gmail.com> writes:

> What about "fn" or "fun", for "function"?

The only downside to "fn" is that people will accuse Ruby of stealing
ideas from Arc. If we are OK with that, then I support that
suggestion. =)

But yes, I agree that "define" implies "this term means this definition"
and thus is not appropriate for anonymous functions. Even HTML
definition lists enforce this notion.

-Phil