RE: [External] : Rename .dir-locals.el to .dir-locals.eld

[Drew Adams]

> > I think you're talking about Lisp code that's
> > Lisp-`read'able without error, but not
> > necessarily `eval'able without error.
> >
> > If so, fine.  But that, in itself, doesn't
> > say why it merits a different file extension.
> > There may be good reasons.  So far, haven't
> > heard any.
> 
> From my point of view, it is an indication that the lisp forms in the
> file are not guaranteed to be (and most likely will not be) evaluated.
> Having a separate mode means that buffers with this mode can
> automatically avoid linting as if they were top level forms intended for
> evaluation.  Having a separate extension makes it easy to automatically
> use a different editing mode.  Also, the extension and mode are good
> indicators to the user that any forms generally meant for evaluation
> (like backquote) are not guaranteed to enter a context in which they
> will be evaluated.
> 
> All of this is just my opinion.  I did not go back and reread the
> discussion that led to lisp-data-mode.  I remember that I was swayed by
> the reasons in that discussion, so the reasons I state above may not be
> good enough to merit the change in your opinion.

Thank you.  And congratulations on being the
first (and so far only) one to present reasons
in favor of the proposed file-extension change.

Seriously.  Whether it's the White House or
some other bike shed, saying why & why not
paint it green helps the discussion.