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: Should lexical-let use let in the situation lexical-binding is t ? Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2012 23:26:41 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20120918192807.6a426ea58372355516a2ea50@cx4a.org> <87mx0lzmys.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1348111606 5052 80.91.229.3 (20 Sep 2012 03:26:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2012 03:26:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: sds@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 20 05:26:50 2012 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 1TEXPe-0007BI-AA for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Sep 2012 05:26:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47753 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TEXPZ-0000QS-Vj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 23:26:45 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:60793) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TEXPX-0000QA-Jk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 23:26:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TEXPW-0000Bf-Na for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 23:26:43 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:20365) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TEXPW-0000Ba-JR; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 23:26:42 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Al8FAG6Zu0/O+Ld6/2dsb2JhbABEsX2CFIEIghUBAQQBViMFCws0EhQYDYhABboJjSaDHgOjM4FYgwU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,637,1330923600"; d="scan'208";a="199514292" Original-Received: from 206-248-183-122.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([206.248.183.122]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 19 Sep 2012 23:26:41 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 4AE02591B8; Wed, 19 Sep 2012 23:26:41 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87mx0lzmys.fsf@gnu.org> (Sam Steingold's message of "Wed, 19 Sep 2012 18:06:51 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.50 (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:153397 Archived-At: > yep, that's why Common Lisp recommends defvar'd variables to be named > with "*" around the names. Yup, and in Elisp we use the "-" convention instead (which was originally introduced to make up for the lack of packages). Stefan