Re: pcase-if-let?

[Michael Heerdegen]

Davis Herring <address@hidden> writes:

> >        '(let* () then)
>
> This is obviously a typo for
>
>   `(let* () ,then)

Yes, thanks.

> but why not use
>
>   then

Took it from the implementation of `if-let'.  AFAICT it can make indeed
make a difference in some situations.  Doesn't the empty `let*' create a
new lexical environment?  Then the scope of a `defvar' without value is
different, for example.


Michael.