Re: Lexical binding -- do we really need it?

[Kai Großjohann]

address@hidden (Kim F. Storm) writes:

> Or why don't we take the full step ahead... and make your lexical-binding
> the standard binding for let (and defun).  To bind a variable dynamically,
> it has to be declared via defvar/defcustom or using a new `dlet' form.

As far as I understand, the implementation will be very similar to
this, only more backward-compatible.  (Which means that dlet is not
needed.)

kai
-- 
Simplification good!  Oversimplification bad!  (Larry Wall)