From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: A generalization of `thunk-let' (was: `thunk-let'?) Date: Sat, 09 Dec 2017 16:59:47 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87infp9z6j.fsf@web.de> <87r2s5ez0t.fsf@web.de> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1512856834 20501 195.159.176.226 (9 Dec 2017 22:00:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 9 Dec 2017 22:00:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: nicolas@petton.fr, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Michael Heerdegen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 09 23:00:29 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eNnAb-00056u-HK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 23:00:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42684 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNnAf-0007T4-DE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 17:00:33 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52445) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNnA1-0007Sy-A7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 16:59:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNnA0-0007nA-6B for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 16:59:53 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:38225) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eNn9w-0007lA-7F; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 16:59:48 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1eNn9v-0003e1-Lt; Sat, 09 Dec 2017 16:59:47 -0500 In-reply-to: <87r2s5ez0t.fsf@web.de> (message from Michael Heerdegen on Fri, 08 Dec 2017 21:38:10 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:220834 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > Say, you write a user interface, and it includes some toggle commands. > When one of these toggle commands is called, the code will probably need > to recompute some variables to adopt their bindings to the new set of > options. Why design this to work on let bindings rather than on top-level buffer-local bindings? Wouldn't the latter be most convenient for this sort of thing? -- Dr Richard Stallman President, Free Software Foundation (https://gnu.org, https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org) Skype: No way! See https://stallman.org/skype.html.