From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: lexical-binding is turned on in more use cases Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:26:38 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83k13ubv3g.fsf@gnu.org> <83imjebsrh.fsf@gnu.org> <20200308193048.GB4832@ACM> <20200309202259.GA16294@ACM> <20200310184127.GA5046@ACM> <20200310194110.GC5046@ACM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="70124"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 10 21:27:43 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1jBlTb-000I9M-7m for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 21:27:43 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39864 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jBlTa-0006Fv-9e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:27:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56555) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jBlSg-00050R-6s for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:26:47 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jBlSe-0003hh-LC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:26:45 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:34434) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jBlSc-0003I1-Ku; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:26:42 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E4E9C44F238; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:26:41 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4525644F236; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:26:40 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1583872000; bh=b/2cV70gxDLuxCDCcffEWbg8WDa3MhLjcph8N8vX9co=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=OGZ04PDW85WoCLvBCrsMLCmk7yxrZKo5yQKts7IsLmgudmL8Z1/wpY3UdzTNMkTD+ oEQiajMp1l0s72a40VYEnybMLQTdX2uET+Fm3GF3hfA3ikg5645OHQ/lrON6Qq+y60 YIDaq0GWAtTdw2wi7WQrvhc7R6W8fIxCYvjy5ZeH+NYnxrj2qQxX9Ch/wVBIyI5QUq mer07WW0i7DpIsfeXYUZAwtNA3J4Wr+9AdiwRdIRjuJClvmwocN8m7GtN27LmhS5st gPFGBanH7J/7ToXFYqKIY1ZwhEc4gJUADa79C5HWcinioFx40EPtlkL/D0AYDQppr6 3Q/diNKfpxxCA== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.50.221]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D228212079C; Tue, 10 Mar 2020 16:26:39 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20200310194110.GC5046@ACM> (Alan Mackenzie's message of "Tue, 10 Mar 2020 19:41:10 +0000") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:245449 Archived-At: >> > You haven't answered the question. Why did you not initiate a discussion >> > on emacs-devel before committing this patch? emacs-devel is where >> > proposals that might or will break things get discussed; not a thread on >> > bug-gnu-emacs, where most affected people won't see it. >> It doesn't break any*thing*, AFAICT: > For crying out loud! My very first post in this thread documented a > breakage which actually happened. Please read it. Your first post showed that it changed the behavior you got when you use `M-:` but it did not break any existing code. Usually we qualify this as "change" and not as "breakage". IOW it's maybe incompatible with your fingers (or your brain/memory) but not with existing code. Stefan