Re: Can we expand the valid location of "Local Variables" ?

[Stefan Monnier]

> Possibly.  Stefan didn't say why he thought adding a variable was an
> improvement, but my guess would be ease of change in the future.

I explained that I don't really want it to be a *variable* but I think
we should remove the various occurrences of 3000 and replace them with
a reference to a centralized place where this *constant* is defined,
with a name that explains what it is.  For the usual software
engineering reasons that say that arbitrary constants should be named.

IIUC this constant is also used from Elisp so it has to be exported to
Elisp where we don't really have constants.  Also I don't see why we
should go out of our way to make it hard for the user to change it.

So an *internal variable* sounds good to me,


        Stefan