bug#27674: 26.0.50; cl-progv: strange scoping due to implementation

[Michael Heerdegen]

npostavs@users.sourceforge.net writes:

> > Why does the lambda still refer to the lexical binding?
>
> Maybe it would be more obvious if we wrote it like this:
>
>     (let ((x 0))
>       (cl-progv (list (intern (read-string "Enter var: "))) (list 1)
>         (funcall (lambda () x))))
>
> Clearly the inner x must refer to the lexical let-binding, right?  Even
> if the user happens to enter `x' at the prompt this remains true.

Not an argument per se, because with lexical binding mode off, you can
surely do that.

> > Does a lexical binding always beat a dynamical one?
>
> Yes, lexical analysis is performed first and then the names are thrown
> away, so you can't even tell when the "same" variable has been
> dynamically bound as well.

Ok, this is the part I was clearly missing, thanks.  I'll have a look if
the documentation tells something like this (it should be spelled out
somewhere).

Then I guess you can close this report.


Thank you,

Michael.