[bug#58812] [bug#59164] Coding style: similarly-named variables

[zimoun]

Hi Maxim,

On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 at 12:02, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer@gmail.com> wrote:

> The intent was to keep away from the following imperative style, which
> hurts both readability and debuggability in my opinion:
>
> --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
> (let* ((my-target "something")
>        (my-target (mutate-once my-target))
>        (my-target (mutate-twice my-target)))
>  (do-something-with my-target))
> --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Well, ’mutate-*’ is not really mutating.  Maybe I miss something and
from my understanding, this ’let*’reads,

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(let ((my-target "something"))
  (let ((my-target (mutate-once my-target)))
    (let ((my-target (mutate-twice my-target)))
      (do-something-with my-target))))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

and not,

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(begin
  (define my-target "something")
  (set! my-target (mutate-once my-target))
  (set! my-target (mutate-twice my-target))
  (do-something-with my-target))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Well, the former is ’lexical-scope’d so the 3 ’my-target’ are not truly
an imperative style, I guess.

Back to the pattern, you are suggesting to write,

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(let* ((my-target "something")
       (my-target* (mutate-once my-target))
       (my-target** (mutate-twice my-target*)))
  (do-something-with my-target**))
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

well, I am not convinced it helps for readibility.  And I think, the
pattern is manually doing what ’let*’ is already doing for you.

Cheers,
simon