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: "Bringing GNU Emacs to Native Code" at the European Lisp Symposium Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:38:25 -0400 Message-ID: References: <69d8b48d-bd09-41c1-a89d-ed76fe0284a4@default> <83imhi22ot.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="9727"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se, drew.adams@oracle.com, akrl@sdf.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 29 14:39:26 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 1jTlzq-0002Rd-D4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 14:39:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37756 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTlzp-0003eZ-Fo for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:39:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56746) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTlz0-0002PA-W1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:38:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTlyz-0003Kj-Sf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:38:34 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:64445) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTlyw-0003JB-Jz; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:38:30 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C86B14506C9; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:38:28 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3AB204506C6; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:38:27 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1588163907; bh=67fHymWjgsvF++OkIUF+oPZhiVQD13pcFzoMpR3JEQk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=lNTiO305GXBsRus61B193c8mcTzg640tyRoQ5i2yIVgoXDN4VseHWdXaQ4c6zrFlr R17oSFOo2JQ45+zP/3JYBDwTavHUBiQXPsul6/Un1VH8kLfWxIlPzoM4cyVBDouwtR oZFU4zugDIdqqztlZ+uQBUP1rGRwWoqdGUAKV/3PzfKOupaJuFV8+EcXh/q3bOWOTJ X4wOuVGescCphpHlodPvNICt6Hkb39bwLaOzt39IxEkU3BCaAa2bbEFwCu/ZvTcp2F gy4stURUZfXNIcY/XC6FiM7wEXqoofFTt/SuhZzD7rcq6Fx6hWQLwGxGV3QU5Fh5PL zKEVyZR1Avowg== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.3.202]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A6C06120850; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:38:26 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83imhi22ot.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 29 Apr 2020 10:04:02 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/04/29 08:38:28 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = 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:248123 Archived-At: > Perhaps you should define what "the dynamically scoped dialect of > Elisp" entails, then. Because AFAIU the ELisp manual says that > dynamic bindings have dynamic scope. It's easy to interpret that to > mean that the above two terms have the same practical meaning in > Emacs. They do have the same meaning. The difference is in what you apply it to: a specific binding, or a language dialect. Maybe we should stop talking about our language dialects being either "dynamically scoped" or "lexically scoped" because it's reductive and just talk about Elisp/d (the dialect where all bindings are dynamically scoped by default, except those using `lexical-let`) and Elisp/l (the dialect where all bindings are lexically scoped by default except those applied to vars that have been declared as dynamically scoped)? Stefan