local func = function() ... end
...looks nicer than...
local function func() ... end
It seems there exist two groups of Lua users.
1) First group - users who prefer to emphasize that Lua functions as just regular objects.
The "natural inclination" of 1nd group users is to use the "function" keyword for producing R-values only.
They would be happy with named-functions-syntax completely removed from Lua (despite the small problem with local recursive functions).
2) Second group - users who prefer to write Lua scripts in a way similar to programming in other languages.
The "natural inclination" of 2nd group users is to always see a function's name after the keyword "function".
From their point of view the existing Lua syntax for defining local and global functions is nice.
But when they try to define a function inside an object they are forced to use incongruous "name=function" syntax.
Mixing the two styles in one Lua program is ugly.
I don’t understand the “problem” you are trying to solve
The problem is: the users from 1st and 2nd groups do not have "equal rights".
The former are quite happy in the current Lua, they can always follow their favorite "all-functions-are-anonymous" style.
The latter are unable to always follow their favorite "each-function-is-defined-with-a-name" style.
Please note that most Lua newcomers are in the second group.
