> (name to thing of type X, some thinning of the signature
> of type X)
> if you have a capability, you have what it ALLEGES, and that's that.
Both of these seem to stem from the desire to avoid confusion over name vs. identity. Correct?
>All lambda expressions capture access rights, in the sense that they close
>a set of operations performed by their bodies.
Right. This is one of the problems that was solved in a distributed scheme: things like CORBA, JavaSpaces, etc. do not make it easy to hide objects from other applications. If you pass the IOR around, you can generally get to the object, but in a distributed scheme, you can never see what is not within your scope.
>(apply (lambda object (lambda method (lambda args ((apply method x)
> args)))) some-object)
This makes it perfectly clear.