Follow-up Comment #3, bug #51286 (project make):
> Dit I?
Wow, indeed, my memory is quite far off. Sorry!
I was thinking of an exchange regarding a request for renaming by thutt. Your
only expressed concern was that the behavior of let bindings might not be
clear to people not familiar with languages that have such bindings, i.e.
> In Lisp, "let" creates "local bindings" not a new scope. I'm not sure if
that is more or less clear for people not familiar with Lisp.
My remark on "not fitting the design" was probably my mind trying to think of
good reasons to keep $(let) out of make. It may have been my own concern more
than yours ;-).
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?51286>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
