I beg your pardon.. and thank you for being the first to draw my attention to
the fact that the phrase (a common enough American colloquialism) is
actually a logical fallacy.�� Until now, it's been strictly idiomatic to me.

And thank you for your prompt reply.��

Am I safe to assume that blocks in Smalltalk, as with Lua, capture their
locally-scoped variables (referred to in Lua as "non-local variables") for
correct evaluation in other contexts, such as when blocks are passed as
arguments and return values?�� I.e., cases where the local variables of a
method have gone out of scope and no longer exist, yet are referenced within
the block at some future time when evaluated.�� I expect so; I just haven't
seen it described in this detail.