Re: Default lexical-binding to t

[Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@gmail.com>]

Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com> writes:

>>>    • We recommend enabling ‘lexical-binding’ in new code, and converting
>>>      existing Emacs Lisp code to enable ‘lexical-binding’ if it doesn't
>>>      already.  *Note Selecting Lisp Dialect::.
>>
>> I don't think this justifies nagging a user who explicitly wants some
>> file(s) to be treated as using dynamic binding.  The above is just a
>> recommendation, not a hard requirement.
>
> I don't consider this as much more than a gentle nudge and reminder.
> The mode line indicator has been with us for a few releases already, and
> I personally don't see compelling reasons to change that decision now.

If the goal, eventually, is to have lexical binding as the default, then
it would help to have all code that uses dynamic binding to (eventually)
use an explicitly set the lexical-binding buffer-local variable.  To
that end, while it makes sense to issue a warning for implicit uses of
dynamic binding currently, it is unclear why explicit uses should also
warrant a warning.

I think it would help to distinguish (in the mode line) whether the
dynamic binding is being explicitly requested (which will continue to be
supported in the future) vs when the dynamic binding is the result of a
current default (one that will eventually be changing).  Having a
warning face apply _only_ in the latter situation would be a reasonable
approach.

-- 
Suhail