Reference counting IS a form of GC.

The problem isn't actually that they aren't named: it's that they in most languages use a syntax that's harder to read than a local declaration would be: often the declaration of the function is done embedded in a parameter block, often with another kind of syntax compared to normal definitions.

And you don't have to identify and parse the function definition in the first example?!?

The first example is harder to parse at least for me. Not that it's a huge problem but readability problems tend to add up...

Right. I've only used Haskell and ML.

So exactly what does anonymous functions provide that local functions doesn't? I'm assuming a competent language with first class functions.

If that's what you did you are a fucking idiot! And if you are trying to over-dramatize you still are a fucking idiot (and a liar).

User as in end user or user as in programmer? There's a big difference...

IMHO anonymous functions are crippled by definition. Just declare a local function and pass it instead. Better visibility and follows the structured programming model.

You are embedding more information that could interest a future historian than you may think...

The Wang PC.

Or whenever the first person warned about the same thing. Which was a loong time ago...

The tactics used by those rebels is currently called illegal by the US government - hence their need to place "enemy combatants" in concentration camps* without juridical oversight...

(* using the proper definition)

I honestly don't see how this is anything innovative, this is a known artifact of x86 microarchitecture (it isn't an architectural thing though - and it will not work on all x86 processors*). That it could be used for a copy protection scheme is also obvious to anyone with that level of knowledge.

This, together with things like disabling primed data caches (x86 processors will still allow accesses to caches even when disabled under some circumstances) is a trick that is relatively fragile. And it really doesn't buy much extra security given the existence of a good low level emulator.

(* there are x86 processors with a shared I/D TLB, not commonly in use nowadays though, exercise for the reader ;P)

Mu

Nothing new: Proper polymorphic computer viruses have existed for a long time (>20 years), partially polymorphic viruses for longer...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...

Depends on how comprehensive the type system is. For some examples look at Microsoft Singuarity/Sing# and the BitC language. Verified usage protocols are a very powerful feature.