On Sat, Dec 24, 2022 at 08:21:24PM -0500, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> > I find it very interesting how many Emacs Lisp programmers want to use a
> > highly functional, Scheme-inspired style -- e.g. the recommendation in
> > this thread to use named-let -- despite how the roots of Emacs Lisp are
> > highly imperative.
> 
> What can I say, I'm a pure functional programmer at heart (my own
> experimental language is pure, statically (and dependently) typed, and
> strongly normalizing).

To add confusion to this, I'm a somewhat "in between" type and find
the Lisps ambiguity quite charming. If I had to describe where I
see myself, I'd say "functional in the large, indulging imperatives
in the small" or something.

That said, I love functional let, so thanks, Stefan :-)

Go figure.

Cheers
-- 
t