From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Lexical byte-compilation warnings cleanup Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 16:41:22 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1377031300 1226 80.91.229.3 (20 Aug 2013 20:41:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 20:41:40 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Daniel Hackney , Emacs development discussions To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 20 22:41:41 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VBskG-0000RP-QO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 22:41:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49675 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VBskG-0001NR-9E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 16:41:40 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49038) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VBsk6-0001NC-U3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 16:41:38 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VBsjz-0007Io-Ks for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 16:41:30 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:4463) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VBsjz-0007Ik-Gq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 16:41:23 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABK/CFHO+LNT/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLNBIUGA0kiB4GsR+QDpEKA6R6gV6DEw X-IPAS-Result: Av4EABK/CFHO+LNT/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLNBIUGA0kiB4GsR+QDpEKA6R6gV6DEw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="22663217" Original-Received: from 206-248-179-83.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([206.248.179.83]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 20 Aug 2013 16:41:16 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 83ECB63170; Tue, 20 Aug 2013 16:41:22 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Tue, 20 Aug 2013 08:25:05 -0700 (PDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.182 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:162932 Archived-At: > Excuse me for not following the thread and perhaps not understanding what > you say here. Are you saying that if `lexical-binding' is non-nil then > a function parameter whose name is the same as a dynamically scoped > variable is "not allowed" or does not refer to that variable? Indeed, it does not refer to the dynamically bound variable. > That would be counter to how Common Lisp works, and I thought (and I hope) > that our aim was (is) to use the way Common Lisp marries lexical and > dynamic binding as our model. Elisp is not Common-Lisp. Stefan