From: Phrogz <gavin@...>
Date: 2007-02-06T01:30:13+09:00
Subject: Re: Proc vs lambda vs proc

On Feb 5, 8:29 am, "Patrick Fernie" <patrick.fer...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I found the following:http://innig.net/software/ruby/closures-in-ruby.rb
> to be an interesting read on the different flavors of closures in
> ruby; I think it takes into account some of the 1.9 changes, but it
> may be slightly outdated...

Although certainly interesting, the author seems to have a slightly
too-broad definition of the term closure. He seems to think that
closures must be first-class functions in addition to providing
lexical binding to the environment they were defined in. That's simply
not so.

Further, he seems to be confusing the syntax of Ruby with features.
For example, in a function:
  def foo( *a ); end
You refer to array of values by the variable 'a', not by '*a'; just
so, of course you refer to a block in a function
  def foo( &b ); end
simply as 'b'...he seems hung up that you can't use &b directly.