Re: lexbind

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

>>> (1) What are good ways to declare certain variables dynamic?
>>     `defvar' is the standard way to do that.  CL offers ways to do it inside
>>     `declare' macro calls, but I don't think it's an important refinement.
>
>> I am not sure `defvar' is enough.  The reason is that using it to fix
>> existing packages may require renaming.
>
> Yes, it may require renaming.  It's usually not a big deal, tho.
>
>>> (2) What packages will break?
>
>>     Hopefully none since the lexbind branch only uses lexical-binding when
>>     the code asks for it.
>
>> I did not realize that.  In that case, installing it won't break
>> anything.
>
> Modulo bugs, of course,

Could you list the advantages and the principal difference, and the kind
of breakage to expect?  If most developers can agree this is something
worth having in the long run, then we should make a plan when to
integrate it.  I don't have a feeling yet for the 23.1 time/feature
frame our maintainers are aiming for, namely how early we are in the
feature admission phase.

I certainly would like to have a replacement for the ugly (and
non-byte-compiled)

`(lambda (...) ... ',value )

constructs necessary at various places.  Would lexbind help?  How?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum