Zeno's arrow and instantaneous velocity

Zeno's arrow argument was probably intended to confute philosophers who criticized Parmenides's other arguments against plurality and change. Indeed it developed into an important question about the possibility to represent time as a set of instants. After the formulation of the infinitesimal calculus many maintained that the "arrow" was solved. But, as emphasized by Russell, after the rigorous reformulation of calculus by Weierstrass, in a certain sense, the arrow's question became again significant. Ten years ago Arntzenius proposed Russell's problem again, denying the reality of instantaneous velocity in classical physics. Sheldon Smith answered to Arnztenius, reaffirming the reality of instantaneous velocity. I will attempt to show that in a certain sense Zeno's arrow still stands still and that both Arntzenius and Smith are right. So that the problem of motion is not yet completely solved.