Re: explicitly declare closures???

[Dave Mitchell]

> I guess you missed where I suggested that putting "my" on that
> declaration is also counter-sensical, not to mention redundant.
> "my" implies a brand-spanking-new lexical variable attached
> to this very scope.  The semantics of "outer" (or "closed"...)
> can be defined to imply a lexical variable.

Ah yes, I missed that. I'm not hung up on the actual phrasing, so
dropping the 'my' is fine by me. Actually, given that we have 'my' and
'our', perhaps the new name should be 'their' ;-)