Subject: Re: bug#68075: 30.0.50; New special form `handler-bind`

From: Stefan Monnier <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 01 Jan 2024 10:37:01 -0500

>> Could you give an example piece of code where this "confusing
>> terminology" makes you unsure how things would work?
> That's the quoted part of your patch at the beginning of this message.
> It uses the word "dynamic" twice and "dynamic bindings" once.

So, IIUC, reading that text makes you feel unsure, but you don't really
know what you're unsure of?  Not sure how to fix that.  Should I just
add a line that says that statically scoped variables are not affected?
It feels kinda of odd/redundant to say that since by definition they're
not "dynamic" (and also, any other behavior in this respect would be
*very* weird since the handlers are clearly function *values* and thus
could just as well be written/computed right *before* the
`handler-bind`).  More  importantly I get the impression that it will
still leave a lingering feeling that you're unsure about what other
things could be affected (and how) or about what it means to
be affected.

For this reason it would help if you could try and characterize more
precisely what you find confusing.

        Stefan