Re: Closures - do you understand them well?

[Emanuel Berg]

Michael Heerdegen wrote:

> AFAIU, conceptually the type of binding is a property of the
> code - the interpreter just can run both types of code.

I think lexical/static is much better than dynamic in general,
and was thinking about the other discussion where dynamic
typing resulted in much slower compiled code compared with
static typing, so what about the binding dialect/variable
scope, how does that (lexical vs dynamic) affect the execution
speed of the compiled code?

Obviously both Elisp and CL has both ...

Maybe some optimizations to be made with lexical/static
because of the increased enclosure (ha), modularity
and predictability?

>> And what values are the correct function values then?
>
> Lexical closures use a different representation - see
>
>   (info "(elisp) Closures")
>
> The actual structure is not interesting for programming
> any more.

Are we talking lexical let-closures? Why not?

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal