[racket-dev] P4P: A Syntax Proposal

I just don't think your first example is a very good one.  It's sort
of a randomly, absurdly complicated way of writing 6.  The good
examples for HOFs all take them as parameters.

As for stepping, even in Scheme,

  ((lambda ... ...) ...)

is not something they have necessarily seen EVEN if they've seen
functions-as-values (since I argue those are not the natural first
examples), and that's going to appear when stepping.  So either the
stepper needs to mask such syntax, or they have to be prepared for the
truth.  I don't think P4P makes things worse.

Shriram