>>60
Lambda can be utterly important, and giving it a special syntax is in some ways just fine.
What "special syntax" are you talking about, retard? In pure lambda calculus there's nothing except lambdas, idiot! It's what you might want to add later, all these lets and defines, are "special syntax", imbecile! Except not really so special, given that "let x y z" is equivalent to "lambda x z y" for example, moron!
IHBT by deranged autismal assburgers who don't know shit about shit but are convinced that their condition has a side effect of making them clever, again :(