Better lambdas!!!!!!!!!!

[Meta via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 10 September 2015 at 20:56:58 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
Grøstad wrote:
> If there is a conflict you should use a regular lambda on the 
> outer one?

You could, but then doesn't that defeat the point a bit? My 
example was off-the-cuff, but the point is that we already have a 
fairly concise lambda syntax, and adding a new type will mean 
that we have 4 different ways of expressing the same lambda 
function. It's just not really worth it.