From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Guerry Subject: Re: Add ob-sclang.el for sclang Org-mode babel support in contrib/ Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 21:45:25 +0200 Message-ID: <87wp89rsfe.fsf@bzg.fr> References: <87ink4z27l.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87y3suis4y.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87wp8dpgsf.fsf@bzg.fr> <87fuey28ch.fsf@bzg.fr> <87bmpmg058.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87mv95ofs4.fsf@bzg.fr> <87injtd4mb.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37499) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dMg8b-00087H-B5 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 15:45:34 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dMg8a-0006ii-F3 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Jun 2017 15:45:33 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87injtd4mb.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> (Nicolas Goaziou's message of "Sun, 18 Jun 2017 11:31:08 +0200") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: Nicolas Goaziou Cc: Org-mode Hi Nicolas, Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Bastien Guerry writes: > >> Still: when it is not used, why adding it? > > We are not adding it since it is in the file by default; you removed > it :) I guess it is in the file by default because the odds are good that lexical scoping will be actually used. > This is an odd question, however. The thing is: how is Emacs-lisp > scoping, dynamic or lexical? We ought not consider it to be both > throughout the code base (even though one file still uses dynamic > scoping) as it is just confusing for developers. Since lexical scoping > prevents a whole class of (vicious) bugs, it is the most common type of > scoping among modern languages, by large. As of Emacs 24.1, let's just > consider Elisp to be lexically scoped. I agree it's good to have lexical scoping, but I don't consider Elisp to be lexical scopped -- I consider Elisp to let the user pick up the constraints he wants, with dynamic binding still being the default. > In a nutshell, "-*- lexical-binding:t ; -*-" ought to be a mandatory > cookie in every Elisp file. Maybe lexical binding will be the default behavior one day, but in the meantime, I would suggest to use "-*- lexical-binding:t ; -*-" only if lexical binding is actually used in the file. Best, -- Bastien