Re: [PATCH] Clojure-like syntactic sugar for an anonymous function literal

[Oleh]

> Sure. My point is that existence of prettify-symbols-mode and equivalent
> is another argument against the creation of a shorter-than-lambda
> function literal syntax.

Note that this isn't just a lame

    (defalias 'λ 'lambda)

we're talking about here. `short-lambda' takes away a *whole* paren
nesting level, which can be a lot, when there's only two (and there
usually is).

It makes these one-line lambdas more pleasant to look at, they appear
as simple atoms in the code, instead of structures, as they would:

    (let ((foo (lambda (x) (+ x x)))
          (bar #(+ % %)))
      (list (funcall foo 5)
            (funcall bar 6)))