Because you've added an extra argument, the example calls are no longer correct.

Perhaps renaming the current first argument tothis would be a safer change? (although that would make the argument lists bethis b andthis b c which is less intuitive in my opinion)

I can prepend this and drop the last argument.

@seancorfield : If it's still not good, please feel free to update it so it is fine.

The protocolP /bar-me code is still incorrect because you've added an argument there.

I'll leave it up to@puredanger et al to decide what clarifications actually work / are needed here.

There are a couple of existing issues,#215 and#216, that I think also have some excellent points and examples. I think the most important thing to change about the examples here is to make the examples actually meaningful, and not use foo/bar/baz at all. Or maybe it's syntax + examples or something.

My one hesitation with makingthis more prevalent (even though this is a common usage), is that it implies extra meaning for developers coming from Java (where that is a special thing), and also the anaphoric macroproxy wherethis actually is a "special" bound symbol. But maybe it's just a matter of saying that explicitly in the doc.

I think keepingthis (for a lack of better name) + explicit mentioning behavior in the docs is good enough.
I could try to merge the docs.
@puredanger: please let me know if you want to take this on or not.