title: What are "downward funargs"?
body: <p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jwz" rel="noreferrer">Jamie Zawinski</a> uses that term in his (1997) <a href="http://www.jwz.org/doc/java.html" rel="noreferrer">article &quot;java sucks&quot;</a> as if you should know what it means:</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>I really hate the lack of downward-funargs; anonymous classes are a lame substitute. (I can live without long-lived closures, but I find lack of function pointers a huge pain.)</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>It seems to be Lisper's slang, and I could find the following brief definition <a href="http://www.delorie.com/gnu/docs/emacs/cl_21.html" rel="noreferrer">here</a>, but somehow, I think I still don't get it:</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>Many closures are used only during the extent of the bindings they refer to; these are known as &quot;downward funargs&quot; in Lisp parlance.</p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>Were it not for <a href="http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/" rel="noreferrer">Steve Yegge</a>, I'd just feel stupid now, but it seems, it might be OK to ask:</p>
  <blockquote>
  <p>Jamie Zawinski is a hero. A living legend. [...] <strong>A guy who can use the term &quot;downward funargs&quot; and then glare at you just daring you to ask him to explain it, you cretin.</strong></p>
  <p>-- <a href="http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2008/04/xemacs-is-dead-long-live-xemacs.html" rel="noreferrer">XEmacs is dead, long live XEmacs</a></p>
  </blockquote>
  <p>So is there a Lisper here who can compile this for C-style-programmers like me?</p>