Binding occurence of regions and syntactic sugar with region

[phischu]

Since the language construct region r { ... } has a binding occurrence for r, I would find it more consistent to write region { r => ...}.

Moreover, I would like to have with syntactic sugar for regions: with region r; ... should translate to region { r => ... }.

[jiribenes]

I think it would make sense to do this, but I forsee a problem.

If you'd want both at the same time and if we were to be consistent with how we treat other computations, then:

1. the introduction form would have to be region { {r} => ... }, and
2. the with version would have to be with def r = region; ....

EDIT: It does have an upside, region then needn't be a keyword anymore :^)