From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: lexical-binding rationale? Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 18:49:10 +0000 Message-ID: <20120112184910.GB3132@acm.acm> References: <20120112180109.GA3132@acm.acm> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1326395138 8773 80.91.229.12 (12 Jan 2012 19:05:38 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 19:05:38 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dave Abrahams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 12 20:05:34 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RlPxs-0004NV-Rm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 20:05:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37500 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RlPxs-0007Gt-BM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:05:32 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:53325) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RlPxp-0007GW-Mk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 14:05:30 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RlPoV-0002OS-OY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:55:55 -0500 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:23629 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RlPoV-0002Mm-0g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 13:55:51 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 87545 invoked by uid 3782); 12 Jan 2012 18:55:48 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (pD955673B.dip.t-dialin.net [217.85.103.59]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Thu, 12 Jan 2012 19:55:46 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 3700 invoked by uid 1000); 12 Jan 2012 18:49:10 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 193.149.48.1 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:147629 Archived-At: On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 01:50:33PM -0500, Dave Abrahams wrote: > on Thu Jan 12 2012, Alan Mackenzie wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2012 at 11:47:35AM -0500, Dave Abrahams wrote: > > Request for clarification: > >> I'm sure this has been discussed to death, so please feel free to > >> respond with a link, but... can anyone point me to a rationale for > >> dynamically altering such a fundamental language behavior on the > >> basis of a variable's value? > > What, exactly does "dynamically altering" mean? > Sorry, that's a very dangerous term developed in secret at the > U.S. Department of Redundancy Department. > Let's just say, "altering" > > What is the "fundamental language behaviour" which is being/to be > > dynamically altered. > > What precise relationship has been abstracted to "on the basis of"? > > Which "variable's value" is meant here. > My understanding is that Emacs is using a buffer-local variable called > `lexical-binding' to determine whether variable bindings shall be > dynamic or lexical. OK, got you now! Thanks. > -- > Dave Abrahams -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).