From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: [External] : How to create a higher order function? Date: Tue, 05 Oct 2021 09:38:29 +0200 Message-ID: <871r4z3oqy.fsf@zoho.eu> References: <87k0jawotx.fsf@mbork.pl> <87czoyfipj.fsf@mbork.pl> <87k0j6gvpd.fsf@zoho.eu> <871r5dhp9q.fsf@zoho.eu> <87tui99n63.fsf@mbork.pl> <87mto0usgs.fsf@zoho.eu> <87h7e69vng.fsf@mbork.pl> <87fstpo4sv.fsf@zoho.eu> <87y27g8vwb.fsf@mbork.pl> <87czosqa3q.fsf@zoho.eu> <875yuc7x1b.fsf@mbork.pl> Reply-To: Emanuel Berg Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26501"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:avFsT7tXSsK+OL8IVcAaxee95Bs= Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 05 09:39:35 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@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 1mXf30-0006gq-2w for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 09:39:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44464 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mXf2x-00019E-11 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 03:39:31 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39770) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mXf28-00017X-MB for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 03:38:40 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:42468) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mXf27-0006fY-2g for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 03:38:40 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mXf25-0005Vj-8N for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Oct 2021 09:38:37 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:133554 Archived-At: Marcin Borkowski wrote: > By an "option" I mean a variable I (the user) can set, > either via `setq' (or customize) or via `let' (in my code) > so that Emacs behavior is changed (temporarily in the case > of `let'). Yes, but are people really using `let' to set options? Well, okay, maybe they do ... >> Split up the `let' is what I think, into slet, `dlet' >> (which already exists), and llet, an alias to `let' (or the >> other way around, doesn't matter), which would be the same >> as our `let' under lexical binding. Then remove all ugly >> preprocessor-style ;;; -*- lexical-binding: t; -*- and >> everyone can just use whatever they like with the different >> lets having their (and only their) behavior in the >> docstrings, and that behavior wouldn't change no matter any >> outside fiddling around. > > You mean you could use the same variable sometimes with > `slet', sometimes with `dlet'? Yes, with `dlet' and `let' it would/could be that way - with "slet" it would _always_ be static/lexical so then it would be "same variable name" rather ... > I'm not sure if that is easy or difficult to implement. I'm sure it wasn't easy but Mr. Monnier already have all three in his vault :) -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal