Re: DynamicBindingVsLexicalBinding

[Andreas Röhler]

Am 12.10.2013 20:35, schrieb Dmitry Gutov:
> Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de> writes:
>
> > http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/DynamicBindingVsLexicalBinding
> >
> > it's said WRT lexical binding
> >
> > "Because it's (1) much easier for the user [that is, programmer], because
> > it eliminates the problem of which variables lambda-expressions use
> > (when they attempt to use variables from their surrounding context)"
> >
> > Unfortunately couldn't find a use-case where it is easier - while consenting it 
> > might be easier for the compiler to swallow.
> >
> > Could someone give an example, where lexical binding makes coding easier?
>
> Consider this rather obvious higher-order function:
>
> (defun addinator (a)
>    (lambda (b)
>      (+ a b)))
>
> ;; This doesn't work with dynamic binding, at all
> (funcall (addinator 3) 4)
>
> ;; This returns wrong result with dynamic binding
> (let ((a 42))
>    (funcall (addinator 3) 4))


That's interesting, but can hand-over functions also with dynamic binding.

Do you have a real use-case where lexical-binding is superior?

Can't see goodies from lexical binding beside a simplification for the compiler.