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: Eshell and lexical bindings Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:57:32 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87habxqx41.fsf@nbtrap.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1383242278 23607 80.91.229.3 (31 Oct 2013 17:57:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 31 Oct 2013 17:57:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Nathan Trapuzzano Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 31 18:58:02 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 1VbwVN-0007HW-Tl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 18:58:02 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58668 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VbwVN-0006Ci-He for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:58:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49690) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VbwVE-0006C8-Jw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:57:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VbwV3-00052C-5e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:57:52 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:49882) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VbwUv-00051D-Hq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:57:41 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABK/CFFsoXfp/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLDiYSFBgNJIgeBsEtkQoDpHqBXoMT X-IPAS-Result: Av4EABK/CFFsoXfp/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLDiYSFBgNJIgeBsEtkQoDpHqBXoMT X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="36781550" Original-Received: from 108-161-119-233.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([108.161.119.233]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 31 Oct 2013 13:57:32 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 6C010611E1; Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:57:32 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87habxqx41.fsf@nbtrap.com> (Nathan Trapuzzano's message of "Thu, 31 Oct 2013 11:27:26 -0400") 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:164742 Archived-At: > I'm thinking about implementing optional lexical evaluation of forms > given to Eshell. My intuition is to just use the buffer-local > `lexical-binding' variable to determine whether or not to evaluate forms > with lexical bindings. Does anyone have a better idea? I'd venture a guess that you can change to lexical-binding all-hog and no user will notice. Stefan