From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Pascal J. Bourguignon" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Lexical binding and macros. Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:38:33 +0100 Organization: Informatimago Message-ID: <87sjxzyzw6.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> References: <87r5dmkir6.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> <96134923-1314-4675-bd77-004945a7159e@y3g2000vbm.googlegroups.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1292416849 21188 80.91.229.12 (15 Dec 2010 12:40:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 12:40:49 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 15 13:40:45 2010 Return-path: 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PSqeu-0000Fc-Mb for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 13:40:40 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56842 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PSqeu-0006dk-8r for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 07:40:40 -0500 Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!news3.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 29 Original-X-Trace: individual.net oBekVgEyvyp4ZZ33g3AduA9z5vySvjDHQ+wsQX1UC9nxX1qJwC Cancel-Lock: sha1:MjRhNWZlYjI1ZDE5YzAxZjk3YWU0YjVkNTBhODM2YTg3OGQ3OWFiZg== sha1:oLsPCM8ZBEvxc4nRTTb4jl1ex+A= 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/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:183286 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 List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-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:77522 Archived-At: Elena writes: > On Dec 15, 4:24 am, Stefan Monnier wrote: >> >> ehm ... isn't "lexical-let" from the common lisp extension supposed to >> >> support closures? >> > They're not really closures. >> >> Actually, they are closures.  Admittedly, they're not as efficient as >> one might like, but other than that, they work very well, thank you. >> >>         Stefan > > Do they still leak memory? From http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?EmacsLisp : > > "Note that variables bound with lexical-let are never released, even > if they are never used. Try > > (loop for i from 1 to 100000 collect (lexical-let ((x i)) '())) > > and watch it eat memory. Just wait till the garbage collector kicks in. The variables are named by un-interned symbols. The should be garbage collected as soon as the 'closures' using them are collected. In your example, that's immediately, since no closure is created. -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/ A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.