From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: lexbind Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 14:58:00 +0900 Message-ID: <878x0xww47.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <87ir02fqlw.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87ir02w0op.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1204696248 32669 80.91.229.12 (5 Mar 2008 05:50:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 05:50:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: paul r , emacs-devel@gnu.org, Stefan Monnier , rms@gnu.org To: Miles Bader Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 05 06:51:14 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JWmWw-0004XY-D9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 06:51:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JWmWO-0002iU-W5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:50:33 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JWmWF-0002hK-Mr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:50:23 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JWmWB-0002eD-4d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:50:22 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JWmW9-0002dp-Ul for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:50:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.223]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JWmW2-0005OC-N1; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:50:11 -0500 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84CF61535B8; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 14:50:07 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B68D91A29E5; Wed, 5 Mar 2008 14:58:00 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 7.19 under 21.5 (beta28) "fuki" a883e09e54f7 XEmacs Lucid X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:91357 Archived-At: Miles Bader writes: > "Stephen J. Turnbull" writes: > > > In the spirit of the (lexical-let ...), a possible improvement could > > > be to have a (lexical-defun ...), > > > > What improvement is this over > > > > (require 'cl-macs) > > (flet ((...))) > > > > I guess it requires two less levels of parentheses, and one less level > > of indentation. Anything else? > > Well, practically speaking, a slight problem is that it doesn't work > with cl's implementation of flet (which besides being very ugly, doesn't > actually implement lexical binding anyway). Sorry, I meant `labels', which does claim to do so. Remember, the OP already mentioned `labels'. I'm not asking that we keep the cl-macs implementation (although the `labels' implementation isn't all that ugly, IMO), just why use a different name? Is there a difference in behavior intended?