Let's get the semantic around closure fixed.

[deadalnix]

On Wednesday, 19 May 2021 at 18:43:24 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer 
wrote:
> I don't think a can of worms is opened, but it's not easy to 
> implement for sure. I'm not suggesting that we follow this 
> path. I'm just thinking about "What's the most performant way 
> we can implement closures used inside loops". If a loop 
> *rarely* allocates a closure (i.e. only one element actually 
> allocates a closure), then allocating defensively seems 
> super-costly.
>

There is going to be a ton of situation where the address of the 
variable becomes visible in some fashion.