GNU bug report logs - #74145
31.0.50; Default lexical-binding to t

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: Phil Sainty <psainty <at> orcon.net.nz>, 74145 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, stefankangas <at> gmail.com, Richard Stallman <rms <at> gnu.org>, Visuwesh <visuweshm <at> gmail.com>
Subject: bug#74145: 31.0.50; Default lexical-binding to t
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2025 08:56:28 +0200

> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: stefankangas <at> gmail.com,  74145 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2025 15:00:30 -0500
> 
> >> I wrote "I feel like I'm missing something", but I'm starting to think
> >> that you're the one who missed the fact that the patch I pushed is not
> >> the one you think.
> >
> > No, I'm not missing anything, except some kind of response to those
> > posts.
> 
> Then I'm still missing what is the connection with the patch I pushed.

People suggested various roadmaps forward towards making
lexical-binding the default, with specific steps to be taken to let
users adjust to the change easier than in other roadmaps.  In
response, we haven't produced any roadmap of our own, haven't
explained how the changes which are actually being installed fit into
that roadmap, and didn't even say whether we agree or disagree with
the proposed roadmaps.

That's what I'm missing, looking at the subject from the POV of those
people whose posts I mentioned, and that is the connection with the
patch you installed: what is the place of that patch in the roadmap
that we intend to use?  I think we need to answer those questions, for
the benefit of those people, if not for our own.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.