From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Daniel Colascione Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: lexbind ready for merge Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 08:09:47 -0700 Message-ID: <4D9347BB.8030507@gmail.com> References: <4D926EA9.5080509@gmail.com> <4D92AD2B.40502@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig6CBD3B05F6D4D1F315651E97" X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1301497967 8557 80.91.229.12 (30 Mar 2011 15:12:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2011 15:12:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 30 17:12:43 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4x4c-0004dj-PH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 17:12:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48309 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q4x28-00047f-B5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:10:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=41314 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q4x1z-000479-4p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:10:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4x1u-0000Tl-6E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:09:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-iw0-f169.google.com ([209.85.214.169]:40843) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q4x1u-0000TT-1W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 11:09:54 -0400 Original-Received: by iwg8 with SMTP id 8so1782175iwg.0 for ; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 08:09:53 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type; bh=m9PVzD8CSOOuifBG1F5WkOC8BQsdMaagWzo12fkgIuk=; b=wrU3bWb9GNSwO8z99Ps2XulWxxqPgrlpbVVmsLlutqaHxXAFuamDE7IVatzqDmwsSz 10tLFQurqNE8W3tdmNu2gjLwMc4kDgtWHadzB+N6TIO6OXUspxk3rcnbVVE0gec0B/Mf Tpi6jf3TfPrTI2e+XqP1K//lcc61d12+X7eSs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type; b=a2UdfzOVXO6OEyUhsEByS7P5WNSSnQBl6stebUCbYtUGEhK2WLVvNV5ID0SVzcvD0q 7pPNNOW/oqljlUqm0d7XiIE6Ax5asio+uVTdALRNOl90HK5TcwArw5Np5KZQvQ72tfRH jr6SJdSuAJub9YbKyaud31s81UE+2cBhfccE4= Original-Received: by 10.231.113.194 with SMTP id b2mr1342680ibq.103.1301497793269; Wed, 30 Mar 2011 08:09:53 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.2] (c-67-183-23-114.hsd1.wa.comcast.net [67.183.23.114]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id gy41sm101679ibb.5.2011.03.30.08.09.51 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 30 Mar 2011 08:09:51 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.15) Gecko/20110303 Thunderbird/3.1.9 In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 209.85.214.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:137917 Archived-At: This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig6CBD3B05F6D4D1F315651E97 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 3/30/11 4:35 AM, Juanma Barranquero wrote: > On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 06:10, Daniel Colascione > wrote: >=20 >> Even if it's not particularly common, being consistent with Common Lis= p and >> having fewer special cases are good things. Some people use construct= s like >> this to create module-private variables (which is a bad idea, but that= >> doesn't stop people doing it.) >=20 > Why a bad idea? It's a common idiom for private, persistent variables. Well, it's a great idea if you're into that kind of thing. Personally, I feel that having the ability to peer inside a module's state and see what's wrong is helpful, and truly private variables don't add much over having a naming convention that discourages casual modification. --------------enig6CBD3B05F6D4D1F315651E97 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAk2TR70ACgkQ17c2LVA10VsfvACfXJIE5rW+Edb1w9Jrmyk8grX1 5LoAniDdDLjref0TdegyzU+g7UUEMlVO =OoAn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig6CBD3B05F6D4D1F315651E97--