On Wed 20 Aug 2014 16:41, Kevin Smith <zenparsing at gmail.com> writes:

> I'm still curious why we need to go through such exercises, though. It
> seems clear to me that this is a weakness of the current design, and
> would be easily addressed with syntax. Is there a back-story that I'm
> not aware of?

No backstory that I'm aware of -- only something that doesn't really
fall out from the generators design.  There's just no sensible name you
could give the value (without getting "creative" with lexical scope),
and no continuation waiting to receive it.

Andy

On Wed 20 Aug 2014 16:41, Kevin Smith <zenparsing at gmail.com> writes:

> I'm still curious why we need to go through such exercises, though. It
> seems clear to me that this is a weakness of the current design, and
> would be easily addressed with syntax. Is there a back-story that I'm
> not aware of?

No backstory that I'm aware of -- only something that doesn't really
fall out from the generators design.  There's just no sensible name you
could give the value (without getting "creative" with lexical scope),
and no continuation waiting to receive it.