From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Andrea Corallo Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: "Bringing GNU Emacs to Native Code" at the European Lisp Symposium Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:57:51 +0000 Message-ID: References: <69d8b48d-bd09-41c1-a89d-ed76fe0284a4@default> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="45232"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) Cc: Stefan Kangas , Emacs developers To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 29 20:58:59 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 1jTrv8-000Bfn-VE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 20:58:58 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56156 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTrv7-0002uy-VR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 14:58:57 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40440) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTru7-00024z-MN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 14:57:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTru6-0005ab-TV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 14:57:55 -0400 Original-Received: from mx.sdf.org ([205.166.94.20]:63937) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTru6-0005aH-Cd for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 14:57:54 -0400 Original-Received: from sdf.org (ma.sdf.org [205.166.94.33]) by mx.sdf.org (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPS id 03TIvq09005258 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits) verified NO); Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:57:52 GMT Original-Received: (from akrl@localhost) by sdf.org (8.15.2/8.12.8/Submit) id 03TIvqdk022421; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 18:57:52 GMT In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Wed, 29 Apr 2020 08:35:23 -0700 (PDT)") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=205.166.94.20; envelope-from=akrl@sdf.org; helo=mx.sdf.org X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/04/29 14:47:18 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = ??? X-Received-From: 205.166.94.20 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:248176 Archived-At: Drew Adams writes: >> As the reference in the previous phrase explains >> this is just about what we control in Emacs with >> the `lexical-binding' variable. > > Dunno what previous phrase you refer to. That > variable isn't mentioned in the paper (other > than appearing in a code example). > > A suggestion would be to be explicit about this > in the future - or else explain the phrase. I was referring to the phrase just before the one we are discussing: "We point out that, since Emacs Lisp received in 2012 lexical scope support, two different sub-languages are currently coexisting [15, Sec. 8.1]." > I personally think the phrase used is confusing, > and perhaps misleading. Yes, one could argue > that variable `lexical-binding' kind of splits > Elisp currently into two languages. But that's > not a usual way of looking at it, and it's not > the way that Emacs talks about itself. I agree with you that could have been stated more clearly without assuming the user had visited the reference (this is not a correct assumption). > >> Apologies if you think this could have been >> phrased better, I hope the misunderstanding >> is clarified. > > No need to apologize, at all. It's clear to me > now; thank you for clarifying. > > And thanks for the great work (!) and clear > paper about it. Thanks again. Andrea -- akrl@sdf.org