Re: Rant - Elisp terminology is deceptive

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>]

Kelly Dean writes:
 > Stefan Monnier wrote:
 > > I tend to agree.

I also agree that "default" is worse than "global", but "global" is
not obviously appropriate (to me anyway, obviously Kelly likes it
fine).

 > > This "default-value" and "setq-default" dates back to the very
 > > beginning of time, tho.
 > 
 > Would renaming them be acceptable, so long as the old names are
 > kept as aliases for backward compatibility? I don't think the names
 > ⌜global-value⌝, ⌜setq-global⌝, and ⌜set-global⌝ would cause any
 > confusion with any other concepts in Emacs, and they're unlikely to
 > conflict with anybody's custom code.

Please don't.  Buffer-local values are global values in the usual
sense that they are instance-wide and can be accessed in local context
if not shadowed by let-bindings and the like.  I understand your
mileage varies, but I don't think it's a big enough improvement to
justify having an alias, with neither being deprecated.  And I
definitely don't think it's a big enough improvement to justify
obsoleting the "default" versions.