From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: pjb@informatimago.com (Pascal J. Bourguignon)
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help
Subject: Re: lexical-let detail semantics
Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 02:48:23 +0200
Organization: Informatimago
Message-ID: <87iqhdfx9k.fsf@galatea.local>
References: <mailman.3248.1248688520.2239.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
	<7c63deuuyr.fsf@pbourguignon.anevia.com>
	<mailman.3293.1248739037.2239.help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1248745249 30083 80.91.229.12 (28 Jul 2009 01:40:49 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 01:40:49 +0000 (UTC)
To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 28 03:40:43 2009
Return-path: <help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50)
	id 1MVbgI-0002k1-An
	for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 Jul 2009 03:40:42 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34622 helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1MVbgH-0004Vg-MV
	for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:40:41 -0400
Original-Path: news.stanford.edu!headwall.stanford.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help
Original-Lines: 47
Original-X-Trace: individual.net aB56p8OkgUcDFCqr9GuWDghX3/OAvEz558MgEklsFWUGDfwe/r
Cancel-Lock: sha1:NzU4ZDlkODcxYjM1NDI0ZWFiYWFkODFmMTM1MWMyZTY2MDFhM2FmYQ==
	sha1:6gP9cV97lNc1qqWfgKMdsrn2Mmk=
Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwAQMAAABtzGvEAAAABlBMVEUAAAD///+l2Z/dAAAA
	oElEQVR4nK3OsRHCMAwF0O8YQufUNIQRGIAja9CxSA55AxZgFO4coMgYrEDDQZWPIlNAjwq9
	033pbOBPtbXuB6PKNBn5gZkhGa86Z4x2wE67O+06WxGD/HCOGR0deY3f9Ijwwt7rNGNf6Oac
	l/GuZTF1wFGKiYYHKSFAkjIo1b6sCYS1sVmFhhhahKQssRjRT90ITWUk6vvK3RsPGs+M1RuR
	mV+hO/VvFAAAAABJRU5ErkJggg==
X-Accept-Language: fr, es, en
X-Disabled: X-No-Archive: no
User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/22.3 (darwin)
Original-Xref: news.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:171255
X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor <help-gnu-emacs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs>,
	<mailto:help-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/help-gnu-emacs>
List-Post: <mailto:help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:help-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-gnu-emacs>,
	<mailto:help-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:66442
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.help/66442>

Daniel Kraft <d@domob.eu> writes:
> Hm...  My main point was whether this is expected behaviour I should
> mimic in my implementation, but I take your response that you would
> prefer to have my implementation behave differently (like what I
> described as my expectation)?

Yes.  


   Personnaly, the closer it's to Common Lisp, the better.  Instead of
   providing a lexical-let, I would provide a (with-cl-semantics ...)
   macro where let, let*, lambda, etc, would behave like in CL, and
   where (declare (special var)) would be needed to get dynamic
   binding like in emacs lisp.  defun* would include an implicit
   with-cl-semantics...


> Do you think this would lead to compatibility problems with existing code?

Be sure to document clearly how it works.  


You may try to "grep" all the .el you can find to see how lexical-let
is used.

# locate -r '\.el*$'> /tmp/els
# wc -l /tmp/els
58179 /tmp/els
# xargs cat < /tmp/els | grep lexical-let | wc -l
3485

That's more uses of lexical-let that I would have expected.  You could
use a function such as my map-sexps (in
http://darcs.informatimago.com/public/emacs/pjb-sources.el
) to find all the occurences of lexical-let and analyse what's in
their bodies.




As you can see from the various comments, it seems the behavior of
lexical-let is changing depending on the version, so it's most
probable that no code depend on this yet.


-- 
__Pascal Bourguignon__