Re: master baf1a7a4a0: Turn gv-synthetic-place into a function

[Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de>]

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

> It has some advantages, tho:
> - I think the vast majority of those who are familiar with generalized
>   variables know the "lvalue" term as well, so there is not much loss.
> - A non-negligible number of people who don't know "place" or
>   "generalized variables" have heard to word "lvalue" in one course
>   or another.
> - "lvalue" is known to Wikipedia, contrary to "generalized variables".
> - "lvalue" is shorter than "generalized variables".
> - "lvalue" is obviously a special term with a technical meaning, contrary
>   to "place".

A downside I see is that what we want to name are not really "values",
the term could be misleading.  Yes, and it would not really help to
explain what it is.  The descriptions I found "in the internet" also
sound a bit more "meta" and less concrete than our wording and
terminology.  Just my subjective impression.

I see that the term "lvalue" is already used in
(info "(elisp) Generalized Variables") to capture those who already know
that term.  In sum for me it's good as it is.

Michael.