[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Return
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: Return |
Date: |
Tue, 07 Dec 2010 12:10:11 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
>>> Actually, I'm considering to disallow non-top-level defuns in
>>> lexical-scope mode, just because it's a good opportunity to introduce
>>> such "breakage" and because non-top-level defuns are bugs in 99% of
>>> the cases (in Elisp).
>> I presume by "non-top-level defun" you mean "defun inside a function",
>> not "defun inside a form"...
Yes.
> There are lots of reasons for doing a defun inside of a function. One
> important point of Lisp is making it easy to create code
> programmatically.
There's `fset' for that.
> I don't understand the "bugs in 99% of the cases", I could hardly
> imagine any situation where a defun is used inside of a form
> unintentionally,
That's because you understand Elisp. many Elisp programmers don't.
Stefan
- Re: Return, (continued)
- Re: Return, Miles Bader, 2010/12/06
- Re: Return, David Kastrup, 2010/12/07
- Re: Return,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: Return, David Kastrup, 2010/12/07
- Re: Return, Fren Zeee, 2010/12/08
- Re: Return, Stefan Monnier, 2010/12/09
- Re: Return, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/12/09
- Re: Return, Stefan Monnier, 2010/12/09
- Re: Return, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/12/10
- Re: Return, Fren Zeee, 2010/12/23
- Re: Return, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/12/07
- Re: Return, David Kastrup, 2010/12/07
- Re: Return, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/12/07