Re: Should lexical-let use let in the situation lexical-binding is t ?

[Sam Steingold <sds@gnu.org>]

> * Richard Stallman <ezf@tah.bet> [2012-09-19 10:12:38 -0400]:
>
>     This said, there can be good reasons to force a lexical binding, when
>     you fear that the code might be run in a context where the variable
>     might happen to be defvar'd.
>
> I am very skeptical of that claim.  It seems to me that if your local
> variable is defvar'd by some other code, that is a kind of name
> collision and that other code should use a different name which isn't
> likely to collide with local variables.

yep, that's why Common Lisp recommends defvar'd variables to be named
with "*" around the names.


-- 
Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on Ubuntu 12.04 (precise) X 11.0.11103000
http://www.childpsy.net/ http://ffii.org http://think-israel.org
http://www.memritv.org http://honestreporting.com
There are no answers, only cross references.