From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: lexical-binding questions Date: Sat, 05 May 2012 09:29:39 -0400 Message-ID: References: <871umzrvfw.fsf@gmail.com> <87wr4rqg6g.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1336224587 5400 80.91.229.3 (5 May 2012 13:29:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 5 May 2012 13:29:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Thierry Volpiatto Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat May 05 15:29:47 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SQf3S-0003Yr-JG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 15:29:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34411 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQf3R-0000Xd-S6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 09:29:45 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53656) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQf3P-0000XV-7p for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 09:29:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQf3N-00046k-LD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 09:29:42 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.143.162]:47989) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SQf3N-00045R-HE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 05 May 2012 09:29:41 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApYIACxOgk9MCqD5/2dsb2JhbABDuCMDgQyBCIIJAQEEAVYjBQsLNBIUGA0kiBwFtjKLYYR5BKRFgV2DAw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.75,391,1330923600"; d="scan'208";a="178466163" Original-Received: from 76-10-160-249.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([76.10.160.249]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 05 May 2012 09:29:39 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id A13785910F; Sat, 5 May 2012 09:29:39 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87wr4rqg6g.fsf@gmail.com> (Thierry Volpiatto's message of "Sat, 05 May 2012 08:45:43 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.143.162 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:150282 Archived-At: > Also, in CL, the declare spec is placed at the beginning of the let [...] > Why does it behave differently from CL? Because it forces the interpreter to check for the presence of a `declare' every time it sees a `let', even though it will only find one once per century or so. It's an OK design for a language where there's always going to be a pre-processing of some sort before evaluation but for Emacs's pure naive interpreter it's inconvenient. Stefan