Hrvoje Niksic wrote: What I'm saying is: supposing elisp supported both lexical and dynamic binding. We couldn't just change `let' to be lexically scoped without breaking large amounts of code. However, we could probably change function arguments to be lexically scoped without breaking anything. A similar argument probably applies to other forms which create temporary bindings (e.g. loop, dolist, ...). Personally, I would have thought that function calls account for more dynamic bindings than explicit let forms. I also suspect that most of the cases where dynamic binding is required for backwards compatibility are explicit let forms. -- Glynn Clements <glynn(a)sensei.co.uk&gt;