From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jim Porter Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#66756: 30.0.50; [PATCH] Improve discussion of 'let' in Elisp Introduction manual Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2023 01:01:33 -0800 Message-ID: <64d90b0b-e003-7bc3-5312-6c7ab4c4591f@gmail.com> References: <3ade119d-0f0d-e60e-1bdc-9c7e02c1559c@gmail.com> <381836df-c16f-b3e7-d0c4-473290e165de@gmail.com> <9239b6bd-b476-b6c1-aef9-245e439aee42@gmail.com> <83jzq7fx5o.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="34581"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: rms@gnu.org, 66756@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 24 10:02:13 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1r6S4j-0008q6-4M for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 10:02:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r6S4W-0002JU-TL; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 04:02:00 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r6S4U-0002J9-KF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 04:01:58 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1r6S4U-0000Gg-Bw for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 04:01:58 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r6S4Y-0002rR-DJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 04:02:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Jim Porter Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:02:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 66756 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 66756-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B66756.170081650610976 (code B ref 66756); Fri, 24 Nov 2023 09:02:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 66756) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2023 09:01:46 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35579 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r6S4I-0002qx-90 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 04:01:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pl1-x62f.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::62f]:50379) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1r6S4G-0002qk-Gu for 66756@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 04:01:45 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pl1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-1cf897c8de1so11642675ad.0 for <66756@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 01:01:40 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1700816494; x=1701421294; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:mime-version:date:message-id:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=sQEwkGG2voqhxzPPbPPKBVPzV+Ze1zUevsAmj+7MOD0=; b=hy5w66KFQk2OvWW4rdtacB7rhWUT/TSxj0ghdW42981soO8PgmsBSamLpXmd87Vlod FHg4VRKw2cQVYKC5Hd7f/kr4xcNr888l+VUTYTZjQM5VfIARctKCpWkj/Mf9RwBgajGe l7piixVMBIav8Y2ms/bV+1Ppc7VxnkN4mnpBobYBex3qzLz/DfMYUiHXlrLM9k31w9hw rtykwoHZgyfZKIxiwlIPhGpaysVBuHPspOsZVq9VSiDHncN63iiJUokQcqINY+0SP04S 4D01xwpvZlHGlefBP7F18Vt3TEOT9r5jd9bVh6qAAPDev+W2JxAjhiz4K51JV3UnDXdj kxbg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1700816494; x=1701421294; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=sQEwkGG2voqhxzPPbPPKBVPzV+Ze1zUevsAmj+7MOD0=; b=G8SpGM1fUX1TMZQDHMUgoCwBgWqhAuKSs/zf79coCknfSR+gwTOm9kj2xeyutBI3Xj zPZrFgYuLdDLkKPxVM0m2GcXip62ABiFocKEFiBFvbNrDwmYVTkf1z51Msbw3g/ab+pw EIe2Zwlc3Q5hBjUd4CeBhd8402cpjYl37x0AAIFF7+q+JHAWFASBbNd6ODymrOxee8LZ 9LOpCjOF/vJxNoupZg4hSEYdaiyZbb1K4SXW2giQ359du7GdlU3oiTaxgNqswbuaF2oQ F4+wJya1JaTlQGbm+rq//5vQr71a9/TS86az584V1lAw58CiKXd24dXsbT+eYTqVTU4x 6SeQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YxkS/wXvN92bPjBJF6xayf19NoDF7TP43FG0PftJOHQYK0dUynR eljp1oVcQTvJZgtTC2g+TIM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHuGy2PAR6LUZFTnTeDHSWaUL6jNLMgwJAzgYUtFLFbwLTtQwWLTrP/mKUObDudTAIAWi7eCA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:90a:e7cd:b0:280:cd5f:bf90 with SMTP id kb13-20020a17090ae7cd00b00280cd5fbf90mr2048236pjb.23.1700816493873; Fri, 24 Nov 2023 01:01:33 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.2] (cpe-76-168-148-233.socal.res.rr.com. [76.168.148.233]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id bo21-20020a17090b091500b002809822545dsm2484401pjb.32.2023.11.24.01.01.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 24 Nov 2023 01:01:33 -0800 (PST) Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <83jzq7fx5o.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:274848 Archived-At: Thanks for taking a look, Eli. Just a few questions/thoughts on some of your comments. (I trimmed the others since I'll probably rework the other sections based on how we handle the second part below.) On 11/23/2023 11:06 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > FWIW, I find the use of "overshadows" in the original text to be > better than the "overrides" in the new text. This is partly because > the meaning of "override" is not clear when talking about the use of a > name, and partly because "override" is really inaccurate here. If we > are not happy with the original text, then we need to find something > else, IMO, perhaps a more detailed description. Maybe we should just leave it as is for now? I don't think it's strictly necessary to change that sentence for the rest of the patch to make sense. We could always improve it in a follow up. (Or if someone has the perfect phrase to use here, I'll happily make the change. I just don't want the patch to get bogged down by changes that are merely *near* the parts I'm working on.) >> +As we discussed before, under lexical binding, @code{let} defines a >> +@emph{place} in your code where the variables have their own local >> +meaning. Under dynamic binding, the rules are different: instead, you >> +are defining a @emph{time} in your code when the variables have their >> +own local meaning. > > If this wants to explain the difference between compile-time and > run-time binding, then perhaps it should say so, instead of talking > about the confusing "place where" vs "time when" the value changes? > And if compile-time is problematic (Emacs being an interpreter), then > we should find another description, one that doesn't use confusing > concept of "place". I'm open to other wordings, but I wanted to describe what's going on without getting into the details of the interpreter or how it evaluates the code. The "place" is supposed to refer to the actual body of the 'let' form. That's described in the first part I changed. However, the "time" description could probably be expanded. Maybe we could contrast "within the body of the let expression" vs "during execution of the let expression"? That gets across the idea to me that the former is about compile-time ("body" refers to the actual Lisp form), while the latter is about run-time ("execution").