[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: table.el
From: |
Kai Großjohann |
Subject: |
Re: table.el |
Date: |
Sun, 02 Dec 2001 14:56:54 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/21.1.50 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) |
Tak Ota <address@hidden> writes:
> BTW, what is "lexical binding"? It concerns me. Does it change the
> fundamental rule in emacs lisp programming by obsoleting the dynamic
> binding?
Well, an implementation of lexical binding could stipulate that
variables defined with defvar (and friends) are always bound
dynamically.
So you can still do
(let ((case-fold-search nil))
..some.code.here..)
But for the variables _not_ defined via defvar, the binding would be
lexical. So for example:
(let ((x 1))
(some-func))
With the current `let', x would be bound to 1 while some-func is
executing. With lexical binding, x would be unbound in the body of
some-func. (This assumes that x is not defined with defvar,
naturally.)
It took me some time to come to grips with this.
kai
--
Simplification good! Oversimplification bad! (Larry Wall)
- Re: Merging x*, w32* and mac* sources (was Re: table.el), (continued)
- Re: table.el, Miles Bader, 2001/12/01
- Re: table.el, Tak Ota, 2001/12/01
- Re: table.el, Tak Ota, 2001/12/01
- Re: table.el,
Kai Großjohann <=
- Re: table.el, Miles Bader, 2001/12/02
- Lexical bindings (was Re: table.el), Kim F. Storm, 2001/12/02
- Re: Lexical bindings (was Re: table.el), Kai Großjohann, 2001/12/02
- Re: Lexical bindings (was Re: table.el), Eli Zaretskii, 2001/12/02
- Re: Lexical bindings (was Re: table.el), Kim F. Storm, 2001/12/02
- Re: Lexical bindings (was Re: table.el), Stefan Monnier, 2001/12/02
- Re: Lexical bindings (was Re: table.el), Kim F. Storm, 2001/12/02
- Re: Lexical bindings (was Re: table.el), Miles Bader, 2001/12/02
- Re: Lexical bindings (was Re: table.el), Kim F. Storm, 2001/12/03
- Re: Lexical bindings (was Re: table.el), Miles Bader, 2001/12/03