Re: e and pi

[Wojciech Meyer]

Hi Yidong,

Chong Yidong <address@hidden> writes:

> Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:
>
> I don't like the idea of `float-e' and `float-pi'.
>
> What is the problem with dynamically scoping `e' and `pi'?  If it's only
> the compiler warning, we can give the compiler a whitelist of variables
> not to complain about.

I like the idea of `float-' prefix, at least it tells the type plus it
might tell the module name too (mentioned `prefix convention'), any
language that provides these constants hides it, most likely it lands in
`Math' or `Float' module, so why Elisp should be different? Short names
should be really reserved in the local scope. I agree that `float-pi' is
less expressive than `pi' but if we got a construct (someday) for
opening module it will immediately become visible as `pi'. (we could
have local aliases too, in the scope of file, or toplevel expressions
inside module declarations etc., list of exposed functions...).

Wojciech