Re: Default lexical-binding to t

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> Date: Fri, 8 Nov 2024 14:01:30 +0000
> Cc: joostkremers@fastmail.fm, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> 
> > If you are against this, you are in a tiny minority, and should
> > probably stop fighting this war, because it was lost long ago.
> 
> I'm not.  I'm against the process, or lack of process, by which it was
> introduced.

This "lack of process" is our process.

> I don't think there ever was an explicit decision taken - a thread on
> emacs-devel, which ended up with something such as:
> 
>     "I think we're all agreed that the advantages of lexical binding
>     outweigh the disadvantages, and that from now on we'll work towards
>     converting the entire Emacs code base."

This isn't a parliament.  We discuss stuff, and then whoever is
motivated to do the job does it as well as he/she can, taking the
discussions into consideration.

Take this last discussion about reported nested loads as part of an
error message, and consider your own behavior there.  This is how
everything works here, always had, like it or not.

> Yes, there have been some, even some initiated by me, over the past few
> years.  But none in the context of deciding whether or not to introduce
> lexical binding.

That's because no one was really against it, believe it or not.