Agree on the copy operator, not only for spores, have wanted it more than one time in other languages too.
Not sure how the this binding should work though. If calling a method you need to a) dispatch on the runtime type and b) provide the instance to the method when called.
The compiler would essentially emit the same code that it would in the case of the spore, but it would be automatic. You still get to dispatch on the runtime type, because the binding is created after the method invocation, but before the scope of the lambda to be closed.
I think when a programmer writes "foo.combobulate()", the vast majority of the time, the intend to capture "foo". If they didn't and were being clever, I don't think it's unreasonable for the compiler to expect them to be explicit and write "this.foo.combobulate()" instead. In the former case, the compiler creates the implicit binding to capture, in the latter it does nothing implicit and just closes over "this".
I'm certain that the compiler has enough information to do this, and that it's in accordance with the principle of least surprise ;)
Not sure how the this binding should work though. If calling a method you need to a) dispatch on the runtime type and b) provide the instance to the method when called.