But it's easy to understand. So Tablizer understands it.

It is not about me. I can care less whether a language supports ultra-closures or not. The issue here is why some languages are popular and some are not. Closures add more to the learning curve for "average" programmers than what the benefits they offer make up for [sentence needs rewrite]. If you need knives often, then a swiss-army-knife may be worth it. But if you don't, then a two-blade pocket knife (Eval) is probably sufficient. Eval() may not be as clean as full closures, but it offers almost the same power for *occasional* use.

I have not seen any slam-dunk realistic coded justification of full closures that one can wave in front of programmers and say, "See, it greatly simplifies the code. Thus, the learning curve is worth it".

Your sales presenation is lousy. Perhaps you are a programming genious, but a shitty marketer of languages and paradigms. Don't red herring your failure onto me. The marketing flunkage is yours, not mine. It is not my fault that putting closures in a language will kill its sales.