On 2016-08-16 11:04, Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> Apparently the functions surrounding cl-fill use cl- prefix. so the
>> change appear to be more cosmetic than technical.
> 
> Indeed.  But since the "cl-" prefix has to be used for global (aka
> dynamically scoped) variables, it's good practice to *not* use it for
> lexically scoped variables.
> 
> IOW, I'm all for such cosmetic changes that harmonize the code, but we
> should do that by removing (rather than adding) the "cl-" prefix where
> it's not needed.

Should the change be reverted, then?