Function types versus arrays

[Neal Gafter]

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Alex Buckley <Alex.Buckley at sun.com> wrote:
>> The current draft spec, by the absence of any constraining rules,
>> implies yes.
>
> Finishing up here for now, the 0.1 draft spec doesn't fully imply "yes".
>
> - It implicitly allows, and will continue to allow, an array type whose
> element type is a function type.

Given that there is no way to create a value of such a type (or a
value of a subtype of such a type), other than null, what value is
there in allowing it?  Why would you commit yourself now to that
position for future revisions of the spec?