Dear Mike, i missed another point in your mail. There's another difference between the lambda calculus and the π-calculus. As formulated, the lambda calculus is higher order: you can pass lambda terms as arguments to lambda terms. In the original formulation of the π-calculus it is not higher order. You can pass names around, but you can't pass processes around. There are higher order versions and there is a compilation scheme from higher order to name-passing. However, the higher order structure significantly changes the calculus. For example, you can get rid of replication with higher order structure. Beyond this point you have a bifurcation in the kinds of higher order calculi. In the models proposed by Sangiorgi, et al, you have two kinds of variables -- ones that carry names and ones that carry processes. To my sensibilities this is significant extra structure. In the models proposed by Radestock and myself, you have only 1 kind of variable, but you have reflective structure, allowing the interconversion between processes and names. This structure allows you to drop the new operator. Again, this is clearly extra structure. All in all, i think we can safely conclude that "higher order capability" is another difference between lambda and π-calculus that is not merely administrivia. Best wishes, --greg [For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]