From unknown Thu Aug 14 17:29:15 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#44854 <44854@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#44854 <44854@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files Reply-To: bug#44854 <44854@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 00:29:15 +0000 retitle 44854 [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files reassign 44854 emacs submitter 44854 Stefan Kangas severity 44854 wishlist tag 44854 fixed patch thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 14:34:15 2020 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 19:34:15 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33049 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khe4t-0000hT-8g for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 14:34:15 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:56350) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khe4p-0000hK-O4 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 14:34:13 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37286) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khe4o-0001Ez-2Q for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 14:34:11 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-f51.google.com ([209.85.218.51]:35524) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khe4m-0003uz-1p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 14:34:09 -0500 Received: by mail-ej1-f51.google.com with SMTP id f23so30218051ejk.2 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 11:34:06 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=k99HxjwvtIgbP0JDSIPekIABgbV1E/f5WPZNCDpExig=; b=WXEF6wtZqE/dTR6KKsjaipy7M+IERATXb+Fu6L/w9DLhZ8FI1KG+5NwF++WWTVDxui 930CjODKNAneeIjR8RtGJNU9PRYFmS9aX0tZ8f0ZrhtUzd523KIcgCwYAkLb4zI2lTpx mv7kzfThviKPq2GgbuT2fcDJ+GqNXvzCfKBRUGfM7ECEGYsmfseMp4sujJ28moDrsTKq 8oUOuHrjrPpINqx6z83sQpehpkZQMUXrzQbSBHrMi9OwzWipkhiLqF5w0OYp328Ku6Nr gX8hxix/LgrB6y8BY1EzbetQOrTCEP6r9VaJ+6qLcGNd8nsuTp+EAYia5pL++X3+JMtE xuFQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533iaOI2cEFhtxmQbyEgQyLcula0V+ycEkVEOVSs1Vft0+OxhGQn jIErdyq1u5qMzB8xE6u2JVjYDutfCSTfLJGPrq21MjQx X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwfVKAtTSX+az2Ulihk2kDrxXQEQhxg9+537TG4hOvAdg/0+eECN1WrC3LG+GFOi86ymCkLZ26juY4oXNrRFTs= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4e90:: with SMTP id v16mr5710149eju.477.1606246445715; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 11:34:05 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 11:34:04 -0800 From: Stefan Kangas X-Debbugs-CC: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 11:34:04 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="000000000000d1c20005b4df64fe" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.218.51; envelope-from=stefankangas@gmail.com; helo=mail-ej1-f51.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -13 X-Spam_score: -1.4 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -0.8 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.8 (-) --000000000000d1c20005b4df64fe Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Severity: wishlist Does anyone have any objections to, or see any problems with adding the lexical-binding cookie to autoload files, as in the attached patch? I've tested it, and it works just fine here. --000000000000d1c20005b4df64fe Content-Type: text/x-diff; charset="US-ASCII"; name="0001-Add-lexical-binding-cookie-to-autoload-files.patch" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="0001-Add-lexical-binding-cookie-to-autoload-files.patch" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 X-Attachment-Id: 31e5fd333c9cd3ce_0.1 RnJvbSBjMDQ4YTdmYmZlYTY1MjUyZmYzODU2YjY5NjUxZjdiNmRkMGYyNjgyIE1vbiBTZXAgMTcg MDA6MDA6MDAgMjAwMQpGcm9tOiBTdGVmYW4gS2FuZ2FzIDxzdGVmYW5AbWFyeGlzdC5zZT4KRGF0 ZTogVHVlLCAyMCBPY3QgMjAyMCAxNjowNzoyMCArMDIwMApTdWJqZWN0OiBbUEFUQ0hdIEFkZCBs ZXhpY2FsLWJpbmRpbmcgY29va2llIHRvIGF1dG9sb2FkIGZpbGVzCgoqIGJ1aWxkLWF1eC91cGRh dGUtc3ViZGlyczoKKiBsaXNwL2VtYWNzLWxpc3AvYXV0b2xvYWQuZWwgKGF1dG9sb2FkLXJ1YnJp Yyk6IEFkZCBsZXhpY2FsLWJpbmRpbmcKY29va2llIHRvIGdlbmVyYXRlZCBmaWxlcy4KLS0tCiBs aXNwL2VtYWNzLWxpc3AvYXV0b2xvYWQuZWwgfCAyICstCiAxIGZpbGUgY2hhbmdlZCwgMSBpbnNl cnRpb24oKyksIDEgZGVsZXRpb24oLSkKCmRpZmYgLS1naXQgYS9saXNwL2VtYWNzLWxpc3AvYXV0 b2xvYWQuZWwgYi9saXNwL2VtYWNzLWxpc3AvYXV0b2xvYWQuZWwKaW5kZXggMDdiZGE1MzdiMy4u NjNjMjA4MmJiYiAxMDA2NDQKLS0tIGEvbGlzcC9lbWFjcy1saXNwL2F1dG9sb2FkLmVsCisrKyBi L2xpc3AvZW1hY3MtbGlzcC9hdXRvbG9hZC5lbApAQCAtMzY4LDcgKzM2OCw3IEBAIGF1dG9sb2Fk LXJ1YnJpYwogICAobGV0ICgoYmFzZW5hbWUgKGZpbGUtbmFtZS1ub25kaXJlY3RvcnkgZmlsZSkp CiAJKGxwIChpZiAoZXF1YWwgdHlwZSAicGFja2FnZSIpIChzZXRxIHR5cGUgImF1dG9sb2FkcyIp KSkpCiAgICAgKGNvbmNhdCAiOzs7ICIgYmFzZW5hbWUKLQkgICAgIiAtLS0gYXV0b21hdGljYWxs eSBleHRyYWN0ZWQgIiAob3IgdHlwZSAiYXV0b2xvYWRzIikgIlxuIgorICAgICAgICAgICAgIiAt LS0gYXV0b21hdGljYWxseSBleHRyYWN0ZWQgIiAob3IgdHlwZSAiYXV0b2xvYWRzIikgIiAgLSot IGxleGljYWwtYmluZGluZzogdCAtKi1cbiIKIAkgICAgIjs7XG4iCiAJICAgICI7OzsgQ29kZTpc blxuIgogCSAgICAoaWYgbHAKLS0gCjIuMjkuMgoK --000000000000d1c20005b4df64fe-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 15:21:36 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 20:21:36 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33146 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kheoi-0001s4-Im for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:21:36 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:38478) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kheog-0001rs-Vo for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:21:35 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:51283) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kheob-0003hc-9A; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:21:29 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4801 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kheoY-0005aT-RX; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:21:29 -0500 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 22:21:26 +0200 Message-Id: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Kangas on Tue, 24 Nov 2020 11:34:04 -0800) Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Stefan Kangas > Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 11:34:04 -0800 > Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca > > Does anyone have any objections to, or see any problems with adding the > lexical-binding cookie to autoload files, as in the attached patch? What are the benefits from doing so? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 15:26:55 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 20:26:55 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33153 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khetr-0001zh-5H for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:26:55 -0500 Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:37576) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khetp-0001zU-3J for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:26:53 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOKIRWo183177; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:26:47 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=fuqrNjp9sEIrkd5L1N0MZ5BxXCD8uAAzMMQ2f7PuWFQ=; b=ijm77vmquV6Ods25PG+hGRuQ9/NlAZioNX4TuKn1zNu7IyCSgtUxc14EqCFg95rDIUd1 sbK8NQM6ru6g8mRLPx4Y49zxnSzizPh/lgCTAHZAwYqdionXTDTKFu+GUxCxS11Rd2iX 1GAAnI4QVJM9vgMPJbb+KwJD/KBN4zLG748jiRBgnRxbGB4jV2SbL4tyccPt3ddqVFxK 1BBx1uV7thp6K4kUkBBl/LTk7mESq6+W87kdRleVQUeqItXqMmCGEuHdeBYXP6xXfSkl d5U3YcKSSj/Oa6LG3vBKsrVqFkBVx0cF9a+WDZsQM36IuauxbQ1BRrqDm27gOnGMLvDN Yg== Received: from aserp3030.oracle.com (aserp3030.oracle.com [141.146.126.71]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 3514q8hfrx-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:26:47 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOKJx9j193103; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:24:46 GMT Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by aserp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 34ycfnsyqf-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:24:46 +0000 Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 0AOKOg7C009955; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:24:43 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <925908cd-bc9d-4c57-9cec-d961c9dbad95@default> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 12:24:41 -0800 (PST) From: Drew Adams To: Stefan Kangas , 44854@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: RE: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.5071.0 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 phishscore=0 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240120 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1011 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240120 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > Does anyone have any objections to, or see any problems with adding the > lexical-binding cookie to autoload files, as in the attached patch? >=20 > I've tested it, and it works just fine here. Ouch! "It works just fine here." Please define "works", and "here". If I understand this right then yes, I object strongly. (It's possible I don't understand it right, however.) 1. What goes in an autoload should have nothing to do with whether `lexical-binding' gets turned on for a file to be autoloaded. No? 2. The code you've changed, IIUC, is used in multiple places, including user functions such as `update-directory-autoloads' and `autoload-generate-file-autoloads'. Why on earth would we assume that a user who wants to update her autoloads for a given user directory or file would necessarily want to force the code to use `lexical-binding'=3Dt? ___ Please back off with the eagerness to paint `lexical-binding' everywhere. Things like this should be handled case by case, carefully. Spray-painting this way is not TRT, IMO. Sprinkling can, not fire hose, please. We'll get to the CL approach to lexical & dynamic binding eventually, petit a petit. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 15:46:47 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 20:46:47 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33193 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfD4-0002Uj-Pm for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:46:46 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-f45.google.com ([209.85.218.45]:44722) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfD3-0002UX-S1 for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:46:46 -0500 Received: by mail-ej1-f45.google.com with SMTP id k9so15637560ejc.11 for <44854@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 12:46:45 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=2PNNnpT4oKCldLDayQFSCBJ/PdBNbDQOdYtUYFdn2BM=; b=GWWmqbMbLYEqqMNHOPGJSj6OwUw5xm4kyG6ZjuGx1bnecz1PV6ZJ4flJKYxoX7jXb6 v7an56gD/Mj4/qwJG/BH4dNprqwa6D/CK/5E68VP3qyDr8qzOEWmIBleKjldjSpJup8o oA2GXa8zuo8su/pJGiact/gvM7rlfxWrD8LOpicVNHmPF/F+6bnRe63lW+CO7AlJBxWa AsmAntMAiq4g0ohInIKEd+3KXNzSCl6SlW5/ZHolckbCGNsj0eagIuDy9bpRKKV8zVEc w6CVmiDmzw9XcLvItEO2EujTJp/C1+25GyI8biLhpXzsa0b6ih5Q4Q9QR1oXNLk0KHlE zNXA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5327rM3H8rVdR2YNboRKw6+elofDbw8BXa6AdrIpDJPbP7pTQFFe cvqoaIUehQhW2KbYnSo0otqyC7kgGszkPVDzXso= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzRgMPnFRBoQ+JFQfqSb096FDh5IG6rhUIGMl6EyoYmLuwmB5eZMg6Ng8a+Ox3k4mLDAZa7retBqRsd7D/igik= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:a182:: with SMTP id s2mr206113ejy.249.1606250800039; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 12:46:40 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 12:46:39 -0800 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 12:46:39 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files To: Eli Zaretskii Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Does anyone have any objections to, or see any problems with adding the >> lexical-binding cookie to autoload files, as in the attached patch? > > What are the benefits from doing so? AFAICT, there are no immediate practical benefits. But if we ever want to have lexical-binding enabled by default, many things will have to be done. This is just another (admittedly small) step on that long journey. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 15:54:51 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 20:54:51 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33205 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfKs-0002gO-QB for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:54:50 -0500 Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com ([141.146.126.78]:43052) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfKr-0002gA-9z for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:54:49 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOKshJt138461; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:54:43 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=YPmGRd22ArNi0sML7cY2zRfBhWX7hEIijSn78WdJ/GY=; b=ZrvSQcv+eRkJLXN1W6jm4CioErrxFEBSlHRKooCTkwS8G7d6JRl+G56cDE9wuySIz7bp SCMn5e5ZFcZf2TscqzDSnWE8X0Xee3NO58xtTf8xzfhscE7TOp+lQ5pJomVwIeRICPWK ZCNLNc3qwDhcuYSHwP09WYs/eIGuH+bFWyhn9f3eABVOsisWNlJvgZuR20SB7+kwY5c2 emvraIESlvh7+cLsgqdvtHbQ4SdDmUrQ3GptOZaEPYlj6E9DizFL+DxnX9fkWHIOXh5o AQtha8Ds6QvDICUY/fTpI62diKornqpqYc3RNKyLtfrToK+d3j3iMRevQeCP922v1nyJ Qw== Received: from userp3020.oracle.com (userp3020.oracle.com [156.151.31.79]) by aserp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 34xtum4w6v-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:54:43 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (userp3020.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3020.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOKnrRQ042401; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:54:42 GMT Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by userp3020.oracle.com with ESMTP id 34ycnt19h9-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:54:42 +0000 Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0AOKseNa017465; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 20:54:40 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <64079950-3f2d-44c3-bf63-ad401f537cf3@default> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 12:54:39 -0800 (PST) From: Drew Adams To: Stefan Kangas , Eli Zaretskii Subject: RE: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.5071.0 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=941 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240124 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=952 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240124 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > >> Does anyone have any objections to, or see any problems with adding > the > >> lexical-binding cookie to autoload files, as in the attached patch? > > > > What are the benefits from doing so? >=20 > AFAICT, there are no immediate practical benefits. But if we ever want > to have lexical-binding enabled by default, many things will have to be > done. This is just another (admittedly small) step on that long > journey. Why would we put such behavior in autoloading? If a file is to be autoloaded then it's up to that file whether it should have `lexical-binding' be t. And when we get to the point that it is t by default there will presumably be nothing to do about that wrt autoloading. At that point, loading a file - ANY file, and regardless of how it is loaded (including autoloaded) - will turn on lexical binding by default. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 16:04:24 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 21:04:24 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33213 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfU7-0002vG-Ug for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:04:24 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:55280) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfU3-0002v0-4w for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:04:22 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:52455) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khfTx-0001z9-6H; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:04:13 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3443 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1khfTw-0004bx-E0; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:04:12 -0500 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 23:04:12 +0200 Message-Id: <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Kangas on Tue, 24 Nov 2020 12:46:39 -0800) Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Stefan Kangas > Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 12:46:39 -0800 > Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > >> Does anyone have any objections to, or see any problems with adding the > >> lexical-binding cookie to autoload files, as in the attached patch? > > > > What are the benefits from doing so? > > AFAICT, there are no immediate practical benefits. But if we ever want > to have lexical-binding enabled by default, many things will have to be > done. This is just another (admittedly small) step on that long journey. I guess I'm asking how is this a step on that journey. Can you elaborate? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 16:05:29 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 21:05:29 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33217 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfVB-0002x3-9i for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:05:29 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-f50.google.com ([209.85.218.50]:39196) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfVA-0002wr-6M for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:05:28 -0500 Received: by mail-ej1-f50.google.com with SMTP id mc24so9421931ejb.6 for <44854@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:05:28 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=4IsKAZiiRugG9lMOATQM7BhZe4jUVLFC+vbyBss2wkU=; b=aUOxQrN6hkplSPl/Bwn8JCQsIV2Odv7YwX9z+xUsZxHg4BHg0xMTOcYt0kqFFHaAOx 9Rys1xijoVGaYy1ZyGO3z/ogQ1AlyKfWC3m4sZw7cmS7ynz7ofgjQ+VNA45Y5ZbEq8iE jD1BLbMnOHhFEAD1ZZ74WwrdlFqActdxOEeav+hRKXLLIFpIMQrWuAc0BanvPoI6OqvB +NS4CCi/KZSmSj4WOUsAXKc/cwCLAbRkP1iG8Bo7MqRn+77mOCCJt6CCmo97sWyG9INS RXqZxgO8tWaQnx/RivMQWbCWdwCV8aI3+xtVkl3gQB0jvjWkylb+WWE7NpW7WnLs/7pc u3lQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530BD/DpYvNGVM9kofiiu/RvWxkV9pN49CufGQ7dqiEWl1fhzX6l hm+pTFsU3gKnHOcbB0azwbyjdR+/JpJ3X5SI5AAO8vBT X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx1lxT982vO7K0Uc6NyK+ajD6pQgZRlZk/6GL5dOwcKuGZ1mII6qtuiVOfJCXIM1L9m7ToDEhZfr9AWMyZztl0= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:11d0:: with SMTP id o16mr276487eja.25.1606251922594; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:05:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:05:21 -0800 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <64079950-3f2d-44c3-bf63-ad401f537cf3@default> References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <64079950-3f2d-44c3-bf63-ad401f537cf3@default> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:05:21 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: RE: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files To: Drew Adams , Eli Zaretskii Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Drew Adams writes: > If a file is to be autoloaded then it's up to that > file whether it should have `lexical-binding' be t. Agreed. Does this affect that in any way? I don't see how. I just replied to a separate email of yours making the above point, so I don't understand if you are simply making the same point twice, or if this is a separate point. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 16:05:39 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 21:05:39 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33220 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfVL-0002xQ-HK for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:05:39 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-f45.google.com ([209.85.218.45]:42029) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfVJ-0002xD-QA for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:05:38 -0500 Received: by mail-ej1-f45.google.com with SMTP id i19so30499397ejx.9 for <44854@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:05:37 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=XGu21aH6Dy2C30kIMmViLmthNYAYsoMFymZmN+2rrmg=; b=IWn22aUmf9fJbKxdsQhbKBNZgfR9cS4kGR2EDrjFvTQ1dkerAud1KYHG4etGgBALFu mgmiNwWubR8XqY/tHqZGmRcRrIM0ZQsQ7763p+Q2e8yz35A84ZcOke+1+3ZNv6kKepEn BEBPcKJ75LOzk/Fb0PRf4WtZp4Oz7yv7WtEGYKz4J3bpv2xxnElpexOEtWIKJ5Mn45Kq YsrbTuHow6qWFTYg6ADx+VV0fPlR+AAmJaiueJZ8b7cXzJnuVNiyGjwIrrMn+6QjbUsR g23x6n1Kh32mR9OVuBDwHiTYkPF/bXPrVGx5UafnzuhGyM361BX/+6ART5OPkB13NCwQ B4eg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530mfS+B8grfqhS/0BSKSYTgtdMq7JH4sf/TVuPP8bRGYBkJHQB6 Ol2BB1Yt4jMOvoU7915WFtVfAwNYv87dqUBWtvM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwAnhzClWjQmp5sNkzcNplU2riHknOKWyw3YbSFsM0AGF4YSTZLXjPH5ueD3ha05KNEdt08jso4MIlwjvGKdAQ= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:1918:: with SMTP id a24mr290802eje.432.1606251932367; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:05:32 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:05:31 -0800 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <925908cd-bc9d-4c57-9cec-d961c9dbad95@default> References: <925908cd-bc9d-4c57-9cec-d961c9dbad95@default> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:05:31 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: RE: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files To: Drew Adams , 44854@debbugs.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Drew Adams writes: >> Does anyone have any objections to, or see any problems with adding the >> lexical-binding cookie to autoload files, as in the attached patch? >> >> I've tested it, and it works just fine here. > > Ouch! > > "It works just fine here." Please define "works", > and "here". Surely those words do not need defining. :-) Do you actually mean to ask how exactly I tested this? The answer to that is that I have used emacs with the change for a couple of hours in my normal usage and found no issues. > If I understand this right then yes, I object strongly. > (It's possible I don't understand it right, however.) [...] > Why on earth would we assume that a user who wants to > update her autoloads for a given user directory or > file would necessarily want to force the code to use > `lexical-binding'=t? This will not force any other files to use lexical-binding. I don't understand what makes you think it would? AFAIK, there is only one thing that enables `lexical-binding' and that is if that buffer local variable is set to t. (You can also provide the optional LEXICAL argument to `eval', but I don't think that applies here.) From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 16:22:55 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 21:22:55 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33255 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfm3-0003OJ-HP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:22:55 -0500 Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:50266) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfm1-0003Nr-64 for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:22:53 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOLIlcQ075977; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:22:47 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=kYIKi10gp1ah1GMlhT8wB4nEGgvWGWPhx7pQlc5RQpY=; b=XCM8C9S3BwGWc1f3PcXu4XQJDWo+45hqcVi3bRDM+fNc7eP982b9n1yQt36bnTiyHlQ0 cqiCG2UFNviDAVAD83L2THFX3D5jqpp4I6dWicLNJKTH3qKrUCu5Kb1afAY1cmHrf6xj RPQ8B3bx3uwZuZCa20Cci3KWMuXgIVUj3jXRkr47FGVO0iMSJjIS3fT9UkdSIDQ1UHEq WKyKX8wQbP737Up00tluZod9hGMuRdfcWgJl0AzZiD2L0MpAR7YiIsNIf2+KWCcxV5gr noqq4V5ICrxxO9KjKWUKSTecKMAiNHaFVFFfYLyUgEGGH/msbhrYUyDovmJznfBmyfpl 7g== Received: from aserp3020.oracle.com (aserp3020.oracle.com [141.146.126.70]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 3514q8hp69-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:22:46 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp3020.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp3020.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOLFggY089464; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:22:46 GMT Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235]) by aserp3020.oracle.com with ESMTP id 34yx8kctqa-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:22:46 +0000 Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0AOLMhiQ001346; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:22:44 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:22:42 -0800 (PST) From: Drew Adams To: Stefan Kangas , Eli Zaretskii Subject: RE: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <64079950-3f2d-44c3-bf63-ad401f537cf3@default> In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.5071.0 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240126 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240126 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > > If a file is to be autoloaded then it's up to that > > file whether it should have `lexical-binding' be t. >=20 > Agreed. Does this affect that in any way? I don't see how. >=20 > I just replied to a separate email of yours making the above point, so > I don't understand if you are simply making the same point twice, or if > this is a separate point. I just received your other message, well after this one. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 16:28:38 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 21:28:38 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33278 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfrZ-0003XU-Vg for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:28:38 -0500 Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:54354) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfrX-0003XH-O7 for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:28:36 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOLISKK069573; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:28:29 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=3G1pFufuIvy21JTjBHJLddLDSlonEmvNbN8PqUDuCB8=; b=Fn88kW+ub9pfn4H4JBue1H4L0Hs0IjwQ4CeKJsNPuZFGgEHorcwgFGjdUyD49uG8hnwh P5uLMovzOA9ufORwhz5/ZM/5X09FKQe5AhfnRliLnZMxHf5Ec/2J2yyeqVFa2eii6wM7 dTrhm8i15fzM0c06QngFnX1uWQZgf3d7TAYz60OVH4LGgkUDhf7V2hzSXF5AKBOxRyMA 1Z3bKeX7QpzivdT3+yw3EGiSNLNPgK9bkjevbDWyMUg6d/75vFKu3Dy9acHsPRMwKDdB iEnJuNAnZHXKsRV2ra1ZOjZacDXRuKU5T3E4MyXhsADq3l2P0lrfZOGYcjumRHSDdiif Bg== Received: from userp3020.oracle.com (userp3020.oracle.com [156.151.31.79]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 3514q8hprj-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:28:29 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (userp3020.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3020.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOLFr3m117178; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:28:29 GMT Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userp3020.oracle.com with ESMTP id 34ycnt263t-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:28:29 +0000 Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0AOLSRYb028028; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:28:28 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:28:26 -0800 (PST) From: Drew Adams To: Stefan Kangas , 44854@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: RE: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <925908cd-bc9d-4c57-9cec-d961c9dbad95@default> In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.5071.0 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240126 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=999 clxscore=1015 impostorscore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 lowpriorityscore=0 phishscore=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240126 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > > If I understand this right then yes, I object strongly. > > (It's possible I don't understand it right, however.) As I said, I may misunderstand what this change does. I thought it was adding `lexical-binding' (by default) to each file that gets autoloaded: > > Why on earth would we assume that a user who wants to > > update her autoloads for a given user directory or > > file would necessarily want to force the code to use > > `lexical-binding'=3Dt? >=20 > This will not force any other files to use lexical-binding. Good. So what is, or are, the NON-other files where this will force lexical-binding? > I don't understand what makes you think it would? Reading the code and trying to understand the patch. I'll be glad to learn I've misunderstood, and that this doesn't impose lexical-binding anywhere. I don't see any necessary relation between (1) autoload files or autoloading and (2) imposing or declaring lexical binding by default for some files. What am I missing? > AFAIK, there is only one > thing that enables `lexical-binding' and that is if that buffer local > variable is set to t. (You can also provide the optional LEXICAL > argument to `eval', but I don't think that applies here.) So what does your patch do wrt lexical binding? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 16:35:31 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 21:35:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33291 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfyE-0003jM-TY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:35:31 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-f41.google.com ([209.85.218.41]:40324) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khfyD-0003j8-3O for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:35:29 -0500 Received: by mail-ej1-f41.google.com with SMTP id oq3so43757ejb.7 for <44854@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:35:29 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0Z23nt5EBSxqkhpJZe9J9PwMrOS/PM4ATj4kMyMxmC0=; b=S2zyVyUuG2Cd6hOKowxNoYdiU4SE+phlsy+RwoYFNmhbk8XfxyQJg9Sd7g7eCKn0Ic GRmbnHZF1h4Cb2TYAUUhVWXFsOtUkcl6JNY3UgM5xZJHO8FwtkEUPvu2PhCb0T4hx1mz EDjbD/A2yTIBIenMM5iSoKBNidUl+6y8IjVhRWzWta6xzo6yh6fgHody11UYRVlP4nwR lvU/h4znWAywvOz6rt4WLV5wa4D5QMyb/q8xEipFAUkfonvrP3buTK7mX0rvdWQooDgT vWOCIw8ZxudpzaykVtbOp32v+G5BjPqgSbY5TnquYWxU2JG6A/75x4/gzFEa78wBRnqd NjhQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532iQwum8nlj0HL7WbbibNho8i1+bsPd8CZv0iz3BCK2Mk2FVPxG nV5zpOLiD5lM88+isFf6PO9fL+AcYCiLCB+kLaM= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxo6j2vM6dVKK6PL0AAPZvvGzTus2X/Ta3MSWekE9qAgx9HY2sh5XtuZBYBUqtsVwK8RASDSbxnrO0MNQZJKHg= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:4e90:: with SMTP id v16mr354638eju.477.1606253723178; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:35:23 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:35:22 -0800 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:35:22 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files To: Eli Zaretskii Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Eli Zaretskii writes: > I guess I'm asking how is this a step on that journey. Can you > elaborate? [ In the interest of full disclosure, I had a brief private discussion with Stefan M about this. I can only speak for myself, but I will share my clarified thinking based on his input. ] I believe that if we want to have lexical-binding by default, we will at some point need to begin issuing byte-compiler warnings for files that do not explicitly say one of "-*- lexical-binding:t -*- or "-*- lexical-binding:nil -*-". This warning would need to be there for a period of time likely to be at least as long as the time span we usually allow before removing any obsolete feature. Probably even longer. Only after such a time period with the warning can we think about using "lexical-binding:t" as the default. At that point, any library that has not yet been converted will hopefully use "lexical-binding:nil". Now, the above idea would involve changing all of our own files to use one of the above. Possibly proposing this change in this manner is putting the horse ahead of the cart. But I was still undecided on whether or not this was worth bringing up for general discussion on emacs-devel for Emacs 28. This just seemed like a small and hopefully uncontroversial step, along the lines of: "there is no reason to not use "lexical-binding:t" in these files, so we might as well add it now, which will make the transition easier in the future". I would be interested in hearing what you think about the above. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 16:46:10 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 21:46:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33306 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khg8X-0003zS-Oj for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:46:10 -0500 Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com ([141.146.126.78]:48734) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khg8V-0003zB-Nf for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:46:08 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOLd2Jp018823; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:46:01 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=S7vUIwRFaYxaesT9UoiNSCxUuBsQKWw7R7tl66fSO6M=; b=rHKyI1iMXsjxAh0fBIwVk0ZYqrskbvMwAD4eV4rhp0OMPThKQqeguL9DCHK8Eecv3Nte DGT2lSIU3HOcDgrYIP5QxD++hFpjMg0iVhYB7fyZwQzNsRM2i6GLkMoXEL2aJJGKgVOO tDkix0NGP0+X59iQJRiQagTWXCkxM4YFm/trhjDI0ULohitEUEJW5K0V8w+sdGDGmeMr lT3J+sqvZqxrBM5uDcrpCrNrC2swiM0GZ+Hz14ZL9QtR1WrZ7S/jN3zZ85msY1ii9bMd NPYFuKNUVPsDudA9XpSc4V5XBvtERd64BkTBOi9VpbfS/bi6tThQwaut/npyZefa12d+ tQ== Received: from userp3030.oracle.com (userp3030.oracle.com [156.151.31.80]) by aserp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 34xtum52ss-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:46:01 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (userp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOLevnt044184; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:44:01 GMT Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 34yctx1pq0-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:44:01 +0000 Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id 0AOLhxXs003324; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 21:44:00 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <11c40358-12f5-4279-9b6e-16779d1097cb@default> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:43:58 -0800 (PST) From: Drew Adams To: Stefan Kangas , Eli Zaretskii Subject: RE: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.5071.0 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240127 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240127 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > This just seemed like a small and hopefully uncontroversial step, along > the lines of: "there is no reason to not use "lexical-binding:t" in > these files, so we might as well add it now, which will make the > transition easier in the future". What are "these files"? My reading (possibly misreading) of the patch led me to think that this would affect any files affected by functions `update-directory-autoloads' and `autoload-generate-file-autoloads', which users use to update/specify autoloading locally. I think you said I'm mistaken about that. But have you said which files _are_ affected by this? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 16:58:07 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 21:58:07 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33311 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khgK6-0004Fb-VP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:58:07 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:35488) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khgK4-0004F7-Pt for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:58:05 -0500 Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6F867100229; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:57:59 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E991C100019; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:57:57 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1606255077; bh=amoNoQu/QCOz4PrCvFSK2/WdOMKQKmqIba47CBOylXY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=ZRrFmi0Q0FFXCAtM23oYYKhucsKcKr0cmxOaBS4RzCIK1kyI7YxMbocEWuR8VeClP 7MlCgNaE8mVB7TzMUIlmuLXqk0tnj4zoNd/7iUNvHaG/duM73EltWN7roEKOCzNnOn udlOjaQg1JNAbwjvWyIoN8Zw/AjSsrjsmILz5QG4YKV0yxmtJ0kW8NxK+iSHceMWbu hLlmXtXPI5FhdbJHzV14/XFLqKuZO443NGX0xGiHlmtJ30ta5qpstEYk+Pps509PKb u15EbEx6NNiTebERpMJgjQnX3GqP2Z768G1iGCmHnNEQp1g+sQNIl5ireNbtuBlPJu AEZJrmyWlKyEQ== Received: from alfajor (69-165-136-52.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.136.52]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EE6A120264; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:57:57 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: Stefan Kangas Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files Message-ID: References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <64079950-3f2d-44c3-bf63-ad401f537cf3@default> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:57:56 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:05:21 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL -0.081 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, Drew Adams X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Stefan Kangas [2020-11-24 13:05:21] wrote: > Drew Adams writes: >>Stefan Kangas wrote: >> If a file is to be autoloaded then it's up to that >> file whether it should have `lexical-binding' be t. Hi Stefan, AFAIK, this is a typical example of Drew's reaction to a suggested change: oppose it without even the vaguest understanding of what the change is about. I recommend you ignore his deluge of messages which tend to just hijack the discussion or at least derail it. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 16:58:52 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 21:58:52 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33315 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khgKq-0004GY-7A for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:58:52 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:37435) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khgKp-0004GM-3k for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:58:51 -0500 Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 7DB2280B6D; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:58:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1F352806A5; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:58:44 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1606255124; bh=BqoaiPl/kZGmeWcbTDZhOKeh8NR57J+M2Ks3qCNLi2U=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=mxL22ml7ORsm0ninZu3dYrjvmhn5T6aogP1QJ6ac4etDaAQ39tcuRvHK9iFR/CT9O ZGD9eRm5bUX+rkIcsplMoC0Qqk2SuX1Z0AsqcpX+kLHRddShzejeneqQn23Xz6cjFX h80N6DUvESABdr4mbPWA4CL5qNVIREXxM0kAGo1RCUhCTd0o+Wt24BAPeCfYYH6rGq gNnfbHwv9CV/sGoCLjRk4qV3qGVnMwWLQ9Jhv9AmSqSGZ8I2E91pKKldQ2bZRYtqpy pjk7EQN17D8ZhYL+Tb9PVPt2VJA9yPlcTdC6iWVpdoU3SdYOB8DfkjcgkHHM7vHD/K WzT2WzD5mXg5A== Received: from alfajor (69-165-136-52.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.136.52]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B0435120310; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:58:43 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: Stefan Kangas Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files Message-ID: References: Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:58:42 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Tue, 24 Nov 2020 11:34:04 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL -0.050 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > Does anyone have any objections to, or see any problems with adding the > lexical-binding cookie to autoload files, as in the attached patch? LGTM, thanks, Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Nov 24 17:41:32 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2020 22:41:32 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33350 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khh07-0005JH-N8 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:41:31 -0500 Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com ([141.146.126.78]:55820) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khh06-0005J5-EH for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 17:41:30 -0500 Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOMYgMB116313; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 22:41:24 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2020-01-29; bh=VZ4R6ZXyO95Kev3LV/IN58VokWO0JvrFsTKvNfs8EIc=; b=g2WzjHPE5OVEE3sry6RuvbQGWq8ShO4RVZKAR4j4v4EazKH48OFWUxuBI0k0R2gZMIsG uZ9ZeRhlHlZtpNbYrbQOUgXoSCJzb0KatwslRdoC2WpCmlmAH+KzX/TCCr8Gz/zerWQx CVjMHf4ES3pm7iAzfNsyh4jHbSiZX9lanfPZCe0ue73uECTvbPpZXNbSRPIHzeLHH+rQ Sxa4ML53WPB7eQ1EX/neOhqEsmQOjehjJzKkkeUTPzOC7pS0MgVO6sIJsik8noJORkA+ LYlE9n2M4nSSxBJi6I1fWlM3gxNN/guWBA7Zrh1NmcEvW9WU50avIE00H19LlctdSPgr rQ== Received: from userp3020.oracle.com (userp3020.oracle.com [156.151.31.79]) by aserp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 34xtum57tc-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 22:41:24 +0000 Received: from pps.filterd (userp3020.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3020.oracle.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 0AOMTrpu126445; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 22:39:23 GMT Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by userp3020.oracle.com with ESMTP id 34ycnt449r-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 24 Nov 2020 22:39:23 +0000 Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id 0AOMdMgB012176; Tue, 24 Nov 2020 22:39:22 GMT MIME-Version: 1.0 Message-ID: <29cb4bf9-35eb-40df-b487-bfd622d2c665@default> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 14:39:20 -0800 (PST) From: Drew Adams To: Stefan Monnier , Stefan Kangas Subject: RE: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <64079950-3f2d-44c3-bf63-ad401f537cf3@default> In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.5071.0 (x86)] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 bulkscore=0 suspectscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 phishscore=0 spamscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240132 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9815 signatures=668682 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 lowpriorityscore=0 malwarescore=0 mlxlogscore=999 impostorscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 phishscore=0 clxscore=1015 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2009150000 definitions=main-2011240132 X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 44854@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > AFAIK, this is a typical example of Drew's reaction to a suggested change= : oppose it without even the vaguest understanding of what the change is ab= out. >=20 > I recommend you ignore his deluge of messages which tend to just hijack > the discussion or at least derail it. (Ignoring the ad hominem attack. Ideas please, not people.) I tried to understand it. I looked at the patch and the source code. I asked what files this applies to. I got no explanation of what this really does (or why). Is it so obvious what the effect is? It wasn't/isn't to me. And I said from the very beginning that I wasn't sure I understand it, and I asked for clarification. I responded to the question asking if anyone has a problem with the proposed change, by saying that IF my understanding of it is correct (and I stated my understanding) THEN yes, I would object. FWIW, Eli too asked what the benefits are - what this is really for. Haven't seen an answer to that either. (I'm not suggesting that Eli, like me, had difficulty understanding what this does.) From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 02:23:58 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 07:23:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34040 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khp9i-0007Z2-5G for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 02:23:58 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:34118) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khp9g-0007Yo-Ph for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 02:23:57 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=mNxwHddN2cucLWUODxHQ+QdFINlY6qYBKSh9//Ru+xA=; b=sGk/+eQEzv1grdcjyZZ4m6O1cd OdCI96+KJIh+CXkWuioBNQzcvGGhm8i3B3jZNvHoyaYfGr3d1Q/g5t3fZ19UCcJ8uyR9Ky/f+gDnK qUt0gaqtjVZjfbyRElF6t2DXH3XJ2xhosLlxtCZTRbLMqC1mlxvN8PnWAlNWHOWN8eHg=; Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=xo) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1khp9T-0004cc-J5; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:23:49 +0100 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen To: Stefan Kangas Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAABGdBTUEAALGPC/xhBQAAACBj SFJNAAB6JgAAgIQAAPoAAACA6AAAdTAAAOpgAAA6mAAAF3CculE8AAAAElBMVEUfHxglJRpMSDZY WUzCnHb///86tvQhAAAAAWJLR0QF+G/pxwAAAAd0SU1FB+QLGQY4HBzTRjYAAAGvSURBVDjLbZSB saQgDIYDbgEBLQDiFaCEAvZW+q/pEmAV3rvMLO7km/8PgSgYJ+HpiX1niQPqg7nmYmfR4QmpShwZ MC4iyF9NPKCI6rxUu+ADoijUITof6XUIgAjUFAgAshiDr3cD3coBVuAEICAKANeJAvltb13FagYG tuMBflAoMA3c1asCt7reVror1AVWXb7Fawba2oK6lQ1uSBujQPomt/2t5b8AUBUa2znYqDdJ7xUk mKMpEDbGKf9Ycfhp1UE6alW5i7rLG6zHWx/27AfXgRx/qNVX/gWQ5Zl2jhMA8EGO6FVSPn8oTr8g 5HLlT3yAHkawAv6Uki+awWk92nJxvniwMk5GIgSxSlyYfLxrIDCE3eTy2QsnisOuMrqFi3gpoKlz WEoNne8BwAlbAxcTjyBKex3wBGAEoYN22UvNZr54F8WqYG/1O5BOOmjzeSsyxzp2dw3TCsjRhxkA N0C/gM8VON+Af6ZDjjfRaeqwTkDe+RQJ/wMsJ0kbuMGCAdCCNSlZIggzkE8DxOQTu4QK3GAFcnmG qJQPLLAOHx5i1ual0w+Dvb843yFs4n/BFVwBr38MeAAAACV0RVh0ZGF0ZTpjcmVhdGUAMjAyMC0x MS0yNVQwNjo1NjoyOCswMDowML0a2v8AAAAldEVYdGRhdGU6bW9kaWZ5ADIwMjAtMTEtMjVUMDY6 NTY6MjgrMDA6MDDMR2JDAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC X-Now-Playing: Modern English's _Mesh & Lace_: "Black Houses" Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 08:23:42 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:35:22 -0800") Message-ID: <877dq92935.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Stefan Kangas writes: > I believe that if we want to have lexical-binding by default, we will at > some point need to begin issuing byte-compiler warnings for files that > do not explicitly say one of "-*- lexical-binding: [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Stefan Kangas writes: > I believe that if we want to have lexical-binding by default, we will at > some point need to begin issuing byte-compiler warnings for files that > do not explicitly say one of "-*- lexical-binding:t -*- or > "-*- lexical-binding:nil -*-". Yup. So adding the cookie to the autoload files is a good idea -- it's unlikely to make a difference, but if does, that's a bug that this change will uncover. And it's better to uncover that now, than when we switch Emacs over to lexical binding on by default. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 10:03:01 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 15:03:01 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36674 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khwJw-0000UB-PX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:03:01 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:49046) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khwJu-0000Tx-M1 for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:02:59 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:45685) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khwJp-0001jw-1M; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:02:53 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1554 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1khwJn-0002s4-UD; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:02:52 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 17:02:52 +0200 Message-Id: <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Kangas on Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:35:22 -0800) Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Stefan Kangas > Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 13:35:22 -0800 > Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > I guess I'm asking how is this a step on that journey. Can you > > elaborate? > > [ In the interest of full disclosure, I had a brief private discussion > with Stefan M about this. I can only speak for myself, but I will > share my clarified thinking based on his input. ] > > I believe that if we want to have lexical-binding by default, we will at > some point need to begin issuing byte-compiler warnings for files that > do not explicitly say one of "-*- lexical-binding:t -*- or > "-*- lexical-binding:nil -*-". > > This warning would need to be there for a period of time likely to be at > least as long as the time span we usually allow before removing any > obsolete feature. Probably even longer. > > Only after such a time period with the warning can we think about using > "lexical-binding:t" as the default. At that point, any library that has > not yet been converted will hopefully use "lexical-binding:nil". > > Now, the above idea would involve changing all of our own files to use > one of the above. Possibly proposing this change in this manner is > putting the horse ahead of the cart. But I was still undecided on > whether or not this was worth bringing up for general discussion on > emacs-devel for Emacs 28. See, this plan is not something that was even discussed, let alone decided upon. When discussing such plans in private email, please consider the effect of that on people who didn't participate in those discussions: they see steps being taken without the goal being clearly announced and agreed upon. I think before we make steps in this direction (as opposed to just switching more and more Lisp files to lexical-binding, where there's code that could benefit from that), we should actually discuss on emacs-devel and agree that this is our practical intention in the near future. Personally, it is not clear to me that we want to switch to lexical-binding by default in Emacs 28. And even if we are, it is entirely not clear that we need to mark all files with some value of lexical-binding as a prerequisite to doing so. > This just seemed like a small and hopefully uncontroversial step Well, you see that it isn't. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 10:08:58 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 15:08:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36688 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khwPh-0000d6-P5 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:08:58 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:38948) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khwPf-0000cq-0g for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 10:08:55 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=2fAq4B0tVkSmP9flbDR92dOkjJ8lGox0gGpaZUaWGfw=; b=gR9otuYia7AUVJS8l3lSlbMQuC lkJlsfIw5u4VOoeBJayRk0pV4qwVXT6/dFio/LXecg+H+fKPfkcz8rP7Rh0Q6nYz4oH6BGtVvO0Dq euQA4Bq7erk5BltRVmbFdwFxMjaeSOmNY0gLaB4478K0Fb1oMRadK/SMcRWsY57a0ecg=; Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=xo) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1khwPT-0008Dn-C3; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 16:08:46 +0100 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAABGdBTUEAALGPC/xhBQAAACBj SFJNAAB6JgAAgIQAAPoAAACA6AAAdTAAAOpgAAA6mAAAF3CculE8AAAAFVBMVEUPCxAeHSQqKCxE PEmXWVlDY5j///+4BjPSAAAAAWJLR0QGYWa4fQAAAAd0SU1FB+QLGQ8HGqK/8rAAAAGqSURBVDjL lZRddqMwDIUlJwuwRBeAxek72OV9GrqBNIf9b6WSbcDQmYe5DzmJP65+TQA2oScVUxW0Qjp0Bk5U wUkDfA4GQB4Jd4ffP0wEp1C3r0YPPMB9Sbs+libUfZR06/R0jBGW1jGur/c5pnV6TXgGkmKUIaUh 4AI1lBZ6/9M0VB3oUR2fTaOnUI/WQbINUHO0Ds4gN2rApa+HFrzIQgzbNLPDl+9YAB9gz6Ghtu2c gcgWqiYnW4gcIHeux/F9nAC6ZwUcMnAAMus8kRWkkiP3wVrvOvW8A9bazGHDX+k1YywAJSigAuYk ib6j5QAGF/TiVPANAQwM4BlwVPCWy52fuok+O3pHbkSSDHB9eocFeCDXE0mnDWhV2RdtJD36zmbX xTwM1t2m3oYoHibrZYiKPbJISrFs8Nbbde7aC2eAZeA+33N9WDjkMQYdX7D0cBHmuXrAy7E+egZY vKgrDvXArq8+6KX8IpbdzkJ6FIREi6DqOEQ6XW3k+g6C1ai3h/QNvgDxnvxWVSuu9/IX2Dv5b/Cv UH/PgXhJjtt/jC2UNytLVdCVmH4AOFxFk1ksnXQAAAAldEVYdGRhdGU6Y3JlYXRlADIwMjAtMTEt MjVUMTU6MDc6MjYrMDA6MDBTdetmAAAAJXRFWHRkYXRlOm1vZGlmeQAyMDIwLTExLTI1VDE1OjA3 OjI2KzAwOjAwIihT2gAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-Now-Playing: Chris & Cosey's _Heartbeat_: "Tight Fit" Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 16:08:42 +0100 In-Reply-To: <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 25 Nov 2020 17:02:52 +0200") Message-ID: <87tutdzd6t.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Eli Zaretskii writes: > Personally, it is not clear to me that we want to switch to > lexical-binding by default in Emacs 28. In Emacs 28? I don't think that's realistic. Perhaps in Emacs 30. Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Kangas , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Eli Zaretskii writes: > Personally, it is not clear to me that we want to switch to > lexical-binding by default in Emacs 28. In Emacs 28? I don't think that's realistic. Perhaps in Emacs 30. > And even if we are, it is entirely not clear that we need to mark all > files with some value of lexical-binding as a prerequisite to doing > so. When we switch to lexical binding per default, the cookies can be removed. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 11:40:14 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 16:40:14 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36785 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khxq2-0002pp-71 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:40:14 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:30740) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khxq0-0002pT-N3 for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:40:12 -0500 Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1867280B69; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:40:07 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3F0A28009B; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:40:05 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1606322405; bh=4vPognTy4SRuk2red0hu2GSry0YTB3ihT+2f+jVx2Io=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=dhg8qRNy1S67askfMEIPlDfQ5WNGiuoNU70q2K+mF57jv5KWpj1v600XcJjG+Jrv1 9V8dnU8LQ1etOp79a+bQQy8X9r/7A7IgWJ04xYGnim35RKNyYphCzgJ0vFMgUgRS4S aUW7U7hjprWFg1J2npKrtlwhW79mxN6KomOHTl100GG+mVV0X5pb4SOTRtsW4yBQQL 2rOAxb7P+BSThl3DPZAwk4diacmwjM7DdLIdNM9ZWRn54RowR2j76cLw5gsI0CvQsA ZYwPyg2TicaVKcB4KsHro+wEJn37PID0V2GRPHFDo8xYLZVOsSQChkKdz/F7s2hhUC IZoT1AnJ86Pbg== Received: from alfajor (69-165-136-52.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.136.52]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 04F67120164; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:40:04 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files Message-ID: References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:40:03 -0500 In-Reply-To: <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 25 Nov 2020 17:02:52 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL -0.049 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Kangas X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > emacs-devel and agree that this is our practical intention in the near > future. I don't think anyone said "near future". > Personally, it is not clear to me that we want to switch to > lexical-binding by default in Emacs 28. I'm pretty sure noone suggested Emacs-28 for such a switch. Lars suggests Emacs-30, and to be honest this discussion is the first time I see an Emacs version attached to such an idea. I myself hadn't even started to think about when that could happen (tho I clearly have thought about how to get there). The first step will be to add a warning when a file doesn't come with an explicit `lexical-binding:` cookie. I hadn't thought about when this could be done, but yes, I guess this could be done in Emacs-28 already, indeed. If so, we should start by adding `lexical-binding:nil` cookies to all the files we haven't converted yet. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 12:30:32 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 17:30:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36849 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khyci-00048e-Jr for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:30:32 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:58246) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khycg-00048S-Mw for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:30:30 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:48768) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khyca-0001vl-NF; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:30:24 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2738 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1khycU-0002JI-J7; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:30:21 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 19:30:20 +0200 Message-Id: <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Monnier on Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:40:03 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: Stefan Kangas , 44854@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:40:03 -0500 > > > emacs-devel and agree that this is our practical intention in the near > > future. > > I don't think anyone said "near future". > > > Personally, it is not clear to me that we want to switch to > > lexical-binding by default in Emacs 28. > > I'm pretty sure noone suggested Emacs-28 for such a switch. > Lars suggests Emacs-30, and to be honest this discussion is the first > time I see an Emacs version attached to such an idea. I myself hadn't > even started to think about when that could happen (tho I clearly have > thought about how to get there). Then perhaps it isn't yet time to start putting the cookies into files that don't need it, like the autoloads files? > The first step will be to add a warning when a file doesn't come with an > explicit `lexical-binding:` cookie. That's an annoyance I think we should avoid. It shouldn't be needed. It's like having a warning for a problem that will take a long time to get rid of. Bad idea, IMO. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 12:54:48 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 17:54:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36890 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khz0C-0004hJ-J3 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:54:48 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:36953) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khz0B-0004h7-AC for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:54:47 -0500 Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E95E6100222; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:54:41 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5FDF51001CB; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:54:40 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1606326880; bh=YL6e/6iXA0arWC1yXVXGO1eYZVKYyC2BPqq4cOXm/bk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=EcIGwrLENLvhQifQmlkFbArgByp/Xd8avuIz1QkKUQ1Z8idIP32WfGRAns0JY02PN y53pfVl9X5KY2lIil1pmzcVK7SegYxkyro3kkWP82E3aSfScrVtNFpe7aRIY1IPvuu vfnYwk5GEst1hnsIsWGtBNTzZ5EuqysrOp3Q2Xgm+SmksjUhb9dhv4mPM4U2G3HVCu 0a92Y1+H86721npOvxI98GdzOAsxS/jZ1WIAKIb/mv4D8wk8VtLMDOqAziNagCLTLp 7S5GnCHVz6o5tT/aMNG1CnqzTY3zyId+ucHudZDQMftSMCG5t/DTV+FSKyuAdSv/HM KLzGMA+YbLc3A== Received: from alfajor (69-165-136-52.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.136.52]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2861A120314; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:54:40 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files Message-ID: References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:54:39 -0500 In-Reply-To: <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 25 Nov 2020 19:30:20 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL -0.086 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > Then perhaps it isn't yet time to start putting the cookies into files > that don't need it, like the autoloads files? I think it would be good to aim for Emacs-28 being distributed with all *its* .el files as well as the Elisp files it generates using `lexical-binding:t`. That's why I'm in favor of adding this cookie to the autoload files now. >> The first step will be to add a warning when a file doesn't come with an >> explicit `lexical-binding:` cookie. > That's an annoyance I think we should avoid. It shouldn't be needed. > It's like having a warning for a problem that will take a long time to > get rid of. Bad idea, IMO. So we should first make sure we use `lexical-binding:t` everywhere. Fine by me, Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 13:22:20 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 18:22:20 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36932 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khzQq-0005La-4h for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:22:20 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:43430) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khzQo-0005LL-2S for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:22:18 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:49836) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1khzQh-0000hf-P9; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:22:12 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1923 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1khzQh-0002bK-2x; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:22:11 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:22:12 +0200 Message-Id: <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Monnier on Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:54:39 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: stefan@marxist.se, 44854@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:54:39 -0500 > > > Then perhaps it isn't yet time to start putting the cookies into files > > that don't need it, like the autoloads files? > > I think it would be good to aim for Emacs-28 being distributed with all > *its* .el files as well as the Elisp files it generates using > `lexical-binding:t`. That's why I'm in favor of adding this cookie to > the autoload files now. What's the rationale? Why not leave it without the cookie, right until the time we turn lexical-binding on by default? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 13:56:50 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 18:56:50 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36982 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khzyE-00069L-99 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:56:50 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:33147) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1khzyC-000698-51 for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:56:48 -0500 Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BF59244073C; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:56:42 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5D8AF44070A; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:56:41 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1606330601; bh=/6WJO08vnMfMmB4kYjCZzPzOIEszBsjDhqaP5qYQRxc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=OcpFfztMOj2xSWxqfaLhNFO34jZ07rEfprMLhtI/sX6Uz2ANySWwpdqKzqt5jC8vl 08F+euvkIi3vc29lOghZXrgmvxts2ARGYNhAZqS7NRpDAXjUfJ5Fvz/vo4/uiN8y1h EtH4rbT5okvHjQC7l9mHW72NMzDlOzYk3VqVZH2pzSDnKvMGedNeXlaJu5RI43Qr4p YThHOMViRGl6pqm5e/jY+LrmNDUmZMZIGxTBue4lllUr10IGkB6y/MIdMVDM+ZFHMe RtM0riuUfnCFPuFeQhfZJMJktpKH99mees2ozNKBSLiVxFgVCogcL+TtYJaXS4Phh4 GbvbgyCqtrhFw== Received: from alfajor (69-165-136-52.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.136.52]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1EB75120312; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:56:41 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files Message-ID: References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:56:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:22:12 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL -0.072 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > What's the rationale? Why not leave it without the cookie, right > until the time we turn lexical-binding on by default? Because when we change the default (not sure what that could be, 2030 maybe?), it will change the way existing files are treated except those that have a `lexical-binding:` cookie. Clearly, this is dangerous and so we want to minimize the number of those files until then. That's the motivation also for the proposal to add a warning when the cookie is absent. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 14:01:31 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 19:01:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36995 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki02l-0006ID-1B for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:01:31 -0500 Received: from mail-ot1-f48.google.com ([209.85.210.48]:41101) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki02j-0006Hy-IZ for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:01:29 -0500 Received: by mail-ot1-f48.google.com with SMTP id o3so3184927ota.8 for <44854@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:01:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=i7yuvchFEhvAZU1YBd3TP4JJPXzkdGuELTWAsH4UEdI=; b=sMJfunh506tbAoLFrS1jKk31KTZdUsKfcr5xn1jSHV89b53cJybMXLFm6vSdo8aU4n EA+2xf2UKNZGs7KrOvIZpYbSB7FNIAPd39EVgDVW1e4rAwxHac+rr7mF58E/N1gQ4GOP 0o7YzcKePysPcp+jzzytuHIF+45NEf4Qf9BybiFNBlyh0J8bres2ATpLildlo1tGfSwH SFOa7WrttQJe6a/6jvhg9pwyHt3Fd3U79AUu8AjX7wgSdBABlAjnkAf1NGYGaY36MtKU 49O85cLWsxkk3h/cRwqqQZCj3EJzqmalASzZd7NRA92nBpaXRU1rHbod7mmGdZAU2QUK FFzw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=i7yuvchFEhvAZU1YBd3TP4JJPXzkdGuELTWAsH4UEdI=; b=AutRA9Xgjwmlj3/biRxtEC0HVj+db2Aj5oZ/NII9yj8SxuNFjm5Hq2KF2NGx9GHpM2 83U3R33BE3+uTiM3iMMkSlkK6ToTmt+Hdd84XdMHRc/67J5r0zVXHZRIRh73+5CoX9LM ULgnRu4Z0tCLFGKK/kx6quimh+uLRmkrUv8Z5pZIFeuQChEGC7gPeK6Kt3xn1QutDM5g wGkCohZXAFOKI8qJlkQjUY86fffwESd5gKS+21l1/kTu+CD9etMwJGeOnhRoKisHqp1p 6zxexiCcz1VVqUPsAV6qye09f7wvLyDSFvSYVI4WM6Uw7qZHEnnbVgnYzrMZSlz9kRui u0/Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531j7mejpD0ugDhNXnhCp/nnXNjNsh1AqTuDtYGu+EsU/M0Du9Jl OBegOcOyCstblEjYf8ejsJbUDGqvq9RVahh0n/c= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwxf5HbbeozvnUx5n4Cw6R6ftWlWHqv66tvjSBCvvycgzX84BBeROQWoSl/wyBsMDY3gId1BLRzVsV6bHyQOpQ= X-Received: by 2002:a9d:72c4:: with SMTP id d4mr3887688otk.149.1606330883791; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:01:23 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: From: Philipp Stephani Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:01:12 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files To: Stefan Monnier Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Kangas X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) Am Mi., 25. Nov. 2020 um 19:58 Uhr schrieb Stefan Monnier : > That's the motivation also for the proposal to add a warning when the > cookie is absent. We should probably even make it an error for one major version to force users to make a decision. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 14:12:17 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 19:12:17 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37064 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0DB-0006aL-4i for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:12:17 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56358) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0D9-0006a7-6g for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:12:16 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:50952) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0D3-0007nl-5v; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:12:09 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4960 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0D2-0000M5-FB; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:12:08 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 21:12:09 +0200 Message-Id: <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Monnier on Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:56:40 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: stefan@marxist.se, 44854@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:56:40 -0500 > > > What's the rationale? Why not leave it without the cookie, right > > until the time we turn lexical-binding on by default? > > Because when we change the default (not sure what that could be, 2030 > maybe?), it will change the way existing files are treated except those > that have a `lexical-binding:` cookie. Clearly, this is dangerous Dangerous for loaddefs.el? why? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 14:15:18 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 19:15:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37076 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0G5-0006fO-Tv for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:15:18 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:57192) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0G3-0006fB-Od for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:15:16 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:51015) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0Fy-00089U-DR; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:15:10 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1178 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0Fw-0000kg-Tp; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:15:09 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 21:15:10 +0200 Message-Id: <834klds0xt.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Philipp Stephani In-Reply-To: (message from Philipp Stephani on Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:01:12 +0100) Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Philipp Stephani > Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:01:12 +0100 > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Kangas , 44854@debbugs.gnu.org > > Am Mi., 25. Nov. 2020 um 19:58 Uhr schrieb Stefan Monnier > : > > That's the motivation also for the proposal to add a warning when the > > cookie is absent. > > We should probably even make it an error for one major version to > force users to make a decision. Not a chance for that flying, sorry. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 14:36:13 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 19:36:13 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37106 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0aL-0007BG-3Q for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:36:13 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-f174.google.com ([209.85.167.174]:40888) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0aJ-0007B3-El for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:36:12 -0500 Received: by mail-oi1-f174.google.com with SMTP id a130so4079252oif.7 for <44854@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:36:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0z1pa26fskDpanx+O4b2u8yEj1HbM5aBcSGFKmygKH0=; b=afnMrKkUsrHfO7ixPRIxtzf95PFuvS5jiZbqH5cCGwBmIW0UIWqGv/tDXeJY44SbED vBs68qN92xvwbgdU6w0MGlZNH8kH6loCNIY12Eyp1ELjX50a67qYD5DnSp0+IVVJ1NP9 bntIXos71M6Ws1eH58432HRGWBP4XZzzh9x10EzzrDP+XJ420GjzNvVySN3E8kkuOMPX iLhid4aiviZwKlPpqzJ+imeIJ795QwbfjwS4G0576iWh5411omqAweu5lETWEscHdGf1 PtBpKivt+QGBhS2nZEe7btq5Kmk8gVW6YnpceJthsv6p8qiG9Zj2d2MiS1iYPGqzDhlk cQNQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0z1pa26fskDpanx+O4b2u8yEj1HbM5aBcSGFKmygKH0=; b=I4nJ2oTsc4YYcGANqFWdm6s2W7Rcx/eTnkJVXv4saHkoWDhOiM9m1fbjV1eDIHALrA or+Y3oQwuLoFdLqeOxTz9ujkm6SGMTiZV8JUvGCmjojl0x/v+ZxpvxfNuO9E7NHK4SEy aS2ho6TmR/sNyYL8OOMe1Tz6xCpjvwVB4hNdbEMtP+8FR4tX3sP/sfFiIxqoQOXycaOJ w43tmo25LyRJbas56XZqKbPdOMn77w4NfDt4rZ4FfU6I4nIUzysjjNtKEUqqCwT0X1GW hnO3GYZzOs9KJBQlVTwsAU/K76Vy9Drl8Ujohd95ML9LOjsoODZAjf4VTjTOqGNu4CxC oaTQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530SY9IvqcUfmOBy+ijZw3VqvlSmyPAC0QHUfaIwrIRTeqxDtUTY BVvrhYtI/0VHPLbN7/6qyjrCrMMKCXUT4dfSE+A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw57y8hclvChPLP64374C8U/Itz4GKqGyjFcqHjlfQN4r0HyZXi7WmMDp+pkv09v5QJ0GWr3nfV9nNM2H+A1ug= X-Received: by 2002:aca:1b0a:: with SMTP id b10mr3233655oib.9.1606332965660; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 11:36:05 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> From: Philipp Stephani Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:35:54 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files To: Eli Zaretskii Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Kangas , Stefan Monnier X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) Am Mi., 25. Nov. 2020 um 20:13 Uhr schrieb Eli Zaretskii : > > > From: Stefan Monnier > > Cc: stefan@marxist.se, 44854@debbugs.gnu.org > > Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:56:40 -0500 > > > > > What's the rationale? Why not leave it without the cookie, right > > > until the time we turn lexical-binding on by default? > > > > Because when we change the default (not sure what that could be, 2030 > > maybe?), it will change the way existing files are treated except those > > that have a `lexical-binding:` cookie. Clearly, this is dangerous > > Dangerous for loaddefs.el? why? > This is just basic risk management. If you want to flip a nontrivial default, you always first switch all existing users to the new default value explicitly. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 15:00:49 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 20:00:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37149 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0y9-0007mD-Fz for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:00:49 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:40598) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0y7-0007m1-D8 for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:00:48 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:51680) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0y1-0007YG-H6; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:00:41 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3941 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ki0xs-00013S-PA; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:00:37 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 22:00:34 +0200 Message-Id: <83zh35qk9p.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Philipp Stephani In-Reply-To: (message from Philipp Stephani on Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:35:54 +0100) Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Philipp Stephani > Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 20:35:54 +0100 > Cc: Stefan Monnier , Stefan Kangas , 44854@debbugs.gnu.org > > > > Because when we change the default (not sure what that could be, 2030 > > > maybe?), it will change the way existing files are treated except those > > > that have a `lexical-binding:` cookie. Clearly, this is dangerous > > > > Dangerous for loaddefs.el? why? > > This is just basic risk management. When there's risk, yes. But I see no risk whatsoever in this case. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 15:06:50 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 20:06:50 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37171 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki13y-0007vK-K8 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:06:50 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:29884) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki13w-0007v8-Qj for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:06:49 -0500 Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4EBBC44074F; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:06:43 -0500 (EST) Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E123044072A; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:06:41 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1606334801; bh=BWd/467kgWQhAk5kBvnlFlpfdckCfBpZkaHh49B7VrI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=bPaTjjdz+DZWaFdEeAUGkkGX03p99rvrhH2gjt7nFc6bF8475r9RyQbMv871E4sP9 z6diM7KiYHALFsGwOIhUkzAyOwO3BrlxbI7Q4aSZJi5rHOlGnOEtwktxIuJUhlOEf4 e2scha4ho/uikVD+11HEyn+d+Z08uWbOxraTdO5G0nUxauf1udtLKNEJovMd6zkZ+l GkhUZ0iq09tIOb+yKqy0QV+2QuYEh6emhdkBqOfY2VAaxiPKotOP1hIWVZBo7qLpHD uMdCmdSC4Gog93FHkeb5k+vg3/hmWwHv+zouxLjgiMlaqBCb2e80yIMWZReruWfKX5 1EczNqd7RiFmg== Received: from alfajor (69-165-136-52.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.136.52]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A4BCD1202FA; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:06:41 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files Message-ID: References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:06:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 25 Nov 2020 21:12:09 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL -0.070 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) >> > What's the rationale? Why not leave it without the cookie, right >> > until the time we turn lexical-binding on by default? >> Because when we change the default (not sure what that could be, 2030 >> maybe?), it will change the way existing files are treated except those >> that have a `lexical-binding:` cookie. Clearly, this is dangerous > Dangerous for loaddefs.el? why? I was not discussing specifically `loaddefs.el`. The reason to change it in `loaddefs.el` now rather than later is because I can't see any benefit to doing it later. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 15:27:52 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 20:27:52 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37218 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki1OK-0008RR-CZ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:27:52 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:55488) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki1OJ-0008RF-8o for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:27:51 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:52436) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ki1OE-0001c7-0v; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:27:46 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1773 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ki1OC-0002zL-Mu; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:27:45 -0500 Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 22:27:40 +0200 Message-Id: <83wny9qj0j.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Monnier on Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:06:40 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: stefan@marxist.se, 44854@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:06:40 -0500 > > >> > What's the rationale? Why not leave it without the cookie, right > >> > until the time we turn lexical-binding on by default? > >> Because when we change the default (not sure what that could be, 2030 > >> maybe?), it will change the way existing files are treated except those > >> that have a `lexical-binding:` cookie. Clearly, this is dangerous > > Dangerous for loaddefs.el? why? > > I was not discussing specifically `loaddefs.el`. > The reason to change it in `loaddefs.el` now rather than later is > because I can't see any benefit to doing it later. That's not a reason good enough in my book, sorry. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 15:54:06 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 20:54:06 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37269 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki1ni-0000da-1k for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:54:06 -0500 Received: from mail-ed1-f50.google.com ([209.85.208.50]:44333) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki1ng-0000d6-Lh for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:54:05 -0500 Received: by mail-ed1-f50.google.com with SMTP id l5so3982182edq.11 for <44854@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:54:04 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=q55TR8uOqsPodhnX3r8+Bg76/sBAPaF2iHWWJYVXi/o=; b=GcR2fTVd5q5I1hQ9zC+G/CTwkyF14SVOywkOs/xXE3Y8CEzLXMxONiuWgTrD8u/qFr peCOQ7i0EYnDAAiweQxyBVZigB+YbTrkmBshmjPdyZ9I6Pcq2YrsQM89AVOcV8s9X2rP GgKOdRPdf5KzEqzL8GdHkP+PurKoUtL8XjeVl8CbMjOay09bZom0ve2t7N6eCp8AWz5A wKscGmJfbohmy/d8orhKJ5gIdf5lbgsLDSukWp6+Y27iSFfXtelJ6JMuh3Mx02uGiCk0 EqSomRLF+2PFh8JrFVve7ru7XkVJoVe7P6Fo7lLc5ZcTtYIRMpfbTMZxOkcMZgb12YXR O6Nw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5334ykhpkcU79hiRPgkCFgcVvLYSVjX3Bv5Vxj+oQIoMI2dQIoYE 53jsGrDxHfmbnPxfG0QNDr2GGvL2fEA8uBpu2tk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJx0EwoaVO+Q6HPgoPuthZti0B3DCcz6jZFwrdMTwJlLjk1JVgtIjKA+tc/aiY2TaNJ/FMV5AF+B4cQAAmZb0LY= X-Received: by 2002:a50:e443:: with SMTP id e3mr5234960edm.160.1606337638743; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:53:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:53:57 -0500 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 15:53:57 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files To: Eli Zaretskii Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Eli Zaretskii writes: > See, this plan is not something that was even discussed, let alone > decided upon. When discussing such plans in private email, please > consider the effect of that on people who didn't participate in those > discussions: they see steps being taken without the goal being clearly > announced and agreed upon. I completely see your point Eli, and I understand your frustration. Private plans could indeed play a negative role if they are not agreed upon but implemented, especially when it comes to big issues such as this one. But the patch here was actually based on my impression that it was generally agreed that we should convert files to use lexical-binding. However, when you asked why I thought that these files should be converted, even though there are few immediate practical benefits, I felt that it deserved a full answer. The other "plan" is not exactly (yet) worthy of that name to be honest. Here's the story: I have learned the hard way that a discussion on emacs-devel can unfortunately very easily focus on exactly the wrong things. I guess to some extent that's just the result of the limitations of discussing via email. My intention was therefore to prepare something well-thought-out that could hopefully constructively move things forward with lexical-binding. So I asked Stefan M privately what he thought about warning when lexical-binding is not set to t. He replied that it is a bad idea, and that we should probably warn if it is not set to t or nil. I agreed, and that's pretty much it. So the only "plan" that can be said to have existed was my personal intention to bring it emacs-devel. But I hadn't yet done so: I was still mulling over the timing (before/after the relase of Emacs 28?) and more importantly its content (i.e. I was planning to write up a patch). I hope that clarifies things. It was never my intention to surprise anyone, least of all any of the maintainers. Sorry for not being more clear in my previous emails and having created confusion. > I think before we make steps in this direction (as opposed to just > switching more and more Lisp files to lexical-binding, where there's > code that could benefit from that), we should actually discuss on > emacs-devel and agree that this is our practical intention in the near > future. OK! It sounds good to take this to emacs-devel. Let's do it. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 25 16:07:28 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Nov 2020 21:07:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37307 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki20d-0000zW-Rm for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 16:07:28 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-f53.google.com ([209.85.218.53]:43504) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ki20c-0000zD-2P for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 16:07:26 -0500 Received: by mail-ej1-f53.google.com with SMTP id k27so4959149ejs.10 for <44854@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:07:26 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=G1Ci7hkkmmldzApxOVYXMVGuVZk4qDUHd4ZQncX6o2w=; b=kPF/uRJnDdRmNjF5qlw2oJOnuQ3T1/JDoXMOb7Ungpu9co9eCThpoe8EapOBgpRr3n wa8caeogURjG/zqzBLUTmAU1O+3dYmpONELoktjdXzhxJhY94J/PMA3+Jbcfu8LDkri4 8/YBSBrRoXSA1KttZbtUqRFtUDNCoQzYzXPOfB1HLMY9v6XIcplUSFkpvwwBdCtqm7gH 6kMkeKWjRbyhaz6rk2/DlqoMdd4E2WlFRyJI+f7VawYKpBAW0cupuZEfbkmNYFA2JkpK ljFq6sniJyT/D2bJc/kVsphuColD6p0GrFZ8E2f0kD4riuYKn+ZDevCSYpHSZW25gKpp IGLA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531CSxr5F6kPsQ+k7NxSpPsD0wBOOMCO4sAB9+pgSMVRW2dsIyE5 TmlGtlKTzHOfPmLPqDh+KJTSxKVUYBmUwkI2o9L03SV5 X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwC5I4l1fo59Nvz6a56etQb/E0WWvItm1Wlu8iCWcCF9pCUwN5siSKAFTj6VQagSfny/KtK2ReH8f+hMe60eLU= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:1918:: with SMTP id a24mr4738964eje.432.1606338440558; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:07:20 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 25 Nov 2020 16:07:20 -0500 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <83wny9qj0j.fsf@gnu.org> References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9qj0j.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 16:07:19 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files To: Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Monnier Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Eli Zaretskii writes: >> I was not discussing specifically `loaddefs.el`. >> The reason to change it in `loaddefs.el` now rather than later is >> because I can't see any benefit to doing it later. > > That's not a reason good enough in my book, sorry. FWIW, I have been working towards this crude metric: find -iname "*.el" -exec egrep -L "lexical-binding: *t" {} \; | wc -l This gives some indicator for how ready we are to "flip the switch". An even better metric would of course be possible, for example by counting SLOC or making it ignore files with side-effect free statements. But it hasn't seemed worth the trouble. Also, the above metric can easily be converted to a TODO-list: find -iname "*.el" -exec egrep -L "lexical-binding: *t" {} \; | sort This is how I've been using it. I've been looking to make the number of files go down by adding the cookie to even insignificant files, as they stand in the way of seeing the files that actually need work.[1] May I ask why you are against it? If we agree that it should make no difference one way or the other, why not just do it? Footnotes: [1] This also doubles as a hack to make this task more fun: there is actual science saying that human beings enjoy seeing numbers increase or go down. Lars has been doing something similar with triaging bugs. :-) https://lars.ingebrigtsen.no/2020/10/26/5x10/ From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Nov 26 09:02:54 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Nov 2020 14:02:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40334 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kiHrK-0005cg-8f for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:02:54 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:35510) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kiHrJ-0005cU-GF for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:02:53 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:42465) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kiHrC-0007iL-Tz; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:02:47 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2478 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kiHr8-0000UO-Sn; Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:02:46 -0500 Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:02:24 +0200 Message-Id: <83o8jkqkr3.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Kangas on Wed, 25 Nov 2020 16:07:19 -0500) Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9qj0j.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Stefan Kangas > Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 16:07:19 -0500 > Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org > > >> I was not discussing specifically `loaddefs.el`. > >> The reason to change it in `loaddefs.el` now rather than later is > >> because I can't see any benefit to doing it later. > > > > That's not a reason good enough in my book, sorry. > > FWIW, I have been working towards this crude metric: > > find -iname "*.el" -exec egrep -L "lexical-binding: *t" {} \; | wc -l > > This gives some indicator for how ready we are to "flip the switch". An > even better metric would of course be possible, for example by counting > SLOC or making it ignore files with side-effect free statements. But it > hasn't seemed worth the trouble. > > Also, the above metric can easily be converted to a TODO-list: > > find -iname "*.el" -exec egrep -L "lexical-binding: *t" {} \; | sort > > This is how I've been using it. I've been looking to make the number of > files go down by adding the cookie to even insignificant files, as they > stand in the way of seeing the files that actually need work.[1] > > May I ask why you are against it? If we agree that it should make no > difference one way or the other, why not just do it? I have nothing against converting Lisp files to lexical-binding, and have never objected to any of your recent changes in that direction. But this makes sense only in files which be affected by that, and autoloads files aren't. "Converting" them to lexical-binding, and modifying the code which produces those files on top of that, sounds like we are afraid of our own shadows, or don't know what lexical-binding is about (or both). My point is that when the time comes to "flip the switch", we can do that without having lexical-binding in autoloads files. They cannot be affected by the switch. If they are, it's probably some subtle bug somewhere. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Nov 27 17:39:43 2020 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Nov 2020 22:39:43 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46545 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kimP1-0002PC-3U for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:39:43 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:60702) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kimOy-0002P4-Kl for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:39:41 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49442) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kimOy-0007N6-D6 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:39:40 -0500 Received: from static.214.254.202.116.clients.your-server.de ([116.202.254.214]:35028 helo=ciao.gmane.io) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kimOx-0003qM-03 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:39:40 -0500 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kimOs-00036x-V3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2020 23:39:34 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org From: Andy Moreton Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 22:39:27 +0000 Message-ID: <868samwhk0.fsf@gmail.com> References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9qj0j.fsf@gnu.org> <83o8jkqkr3.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (windows-nt) Cancel-Lock: sha1:DHufDeJXxwOSz1QFh/No9aKYLpE= Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: 5 X-Spam_score: 0.5 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (0.5 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: 0.1 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.9 (/) On Thu 26 Nov 2020, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Stefan Kangas >> Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 16:07:19 -0500 >> Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org >> >> >> I was not discussing specifically `loaddefs.el`. >> >> The reason to change it in `loaddefs.el` now rather than later is >> >> because I can't see any benefit to doing it later. >> > >> > That's not a reason good enough in my book, sorry. >> >> FWIW, I have been working towards this crude metric: >> >> find -iname "*.el" -exec egrep -L "lexical-binding: *t" {} \; | wc -l >> >> This gives some indicator for how ready we are to "flip the switch". An >> even better metric would of course be possible, for example by counting >> SLOC or making it ignore files with side-effect free statements. But it >> hasn't seemed worth the trouble. >> >> Also, the above metric can easily be converted to a TODO-list: >> >> find -iname "*.el" -exec egrep -L "lexical-binding: *t" {} \; | sort >> >> This is how I've been using it. I've been looking to make the number of >> files go down by adding the cookie to even insignificant files, as they >> stand in the way of seeing the files that actually need work.[1] >> >> May I ask why you are against it? If we agree that it should make no >> difference one way or the other, why not just do it? > > I have nothing against converting Lisp files to lexical-binding, and > have never objected to any of your recent changes in that direction. > But this makes sense only in files which be affected by that, and > autoloads files aren't. "Converting" them to lexical-binding, and > modifying the code which produces those files on top of that, sounds > like we are afraid of our own shadows, or don't know what > lexical-binding is about (or both). If adding a lexical-binding tag has no effect on the autoload files (other than making them a few bytes larger), then it should be of no consequence. The "conversion" would be the same as for many other files that did not require any substantive code changes. Adding the tag to the autoloads is not about needing code changes, but simply a marker that those files are ready for the flip-the-switch event. > My point is that when the time comes to "flip the switch", we can do > that without having lexical-binding in autoloads files. They cannot > be affected by the switch. If they are, it's probably some subtle bug > somewhere. However, by treating all .el files uniformly (including autoloads), it makes it easier to write scripts that check for lexical binding support in source files. Simplifying the conversion process help to ensure that a future flip-the-switch flag day is less likely to introduce problems. AndyM From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Nov 28 02:59:27 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Nov 2020 07:59:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46906 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kiv8h-0001CD-Km for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 02:59:27 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:52158) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kiv8g-0001C1-E1 for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 02:59:26 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:41575) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kiv8b-0005ov-3J; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 02:59:21 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2317 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kiv8Z-0006d4-MS; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 02:59:20 -0500 Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 09:59:06 +0200 Message-Id: <834kl9oqt1.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Andy Moreton In-Reply-To: <868samwhk0.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Andy Moreton on Fri, 27 Nov 2020 22:39:27 +0000) Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9qj0j.fsf@gnu.org> <83o8jkqkr3.fsf@gnu.org> <868samwhk0.fsf@gmail.com> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Andy Moreton > Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 22:39:27 +0000 > > If adding a lexical-binding tag has no effect on the autoload files > (other than making them a few bytes larger), then it should be of no > consequence. The additional code in autoload.el is such a consequence, if nothing else. > Adding the tag to the autoloads is not about needing code changes, but > simply a marker that those files are ready for the flip-the-switch > event. They are already ready for the flip. > However, by treating all .el files uniformly (including autoloads), it > makes it easier to write scripts that check for lexical binding support > in source files. That is an advantage too small to justify the change. Skipping files that all match a simple wildcard pattern is easy. We will always need to skip some files anyway, for example .dir-locals.el. It makes no sense to me, sorry. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Nov 29 05:31:00 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Nov 2020 10:31:00 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49792 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kjJyu-0001vT-0S for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 29 Nov 2020 05:31:00 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:51970) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kjJys-0001pU-Fy for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 29 Nov 2020 05:30:58 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=zgr8wFlpmc3tVkM0Hj/waB3cryTfErOS6k36FPlNH/k=; b=TqUuKxnv0v2O6ASf+Rfh1WPEm4 MWv3qnuYK+/H5mpX6eE/eHSWdiMrgR6ZDXYck8vYIk4M0b0YMrkDrU6E5z38cn2nFqXKu5qh00Bo7 pTjBLl5GLTAIBkdEcXx2IZxTYamzqzT+vtvmPMHeIc5WyusWNdFClpVe0aYiv6+rpzNc=; Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=xo) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kjJyj-0004Ps-Kx; Sun, 29 Nov 2020 11:30:52 +0100 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9qj0j.fsf@gnu.org> <83o8jkqkr3.fsf@gnu.org> <868samwhk0.fsf@gmail.com> <834kl9oqt1.fsf@gnu.org> Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwAgMAAAAqbBEUAAAABGdBTUEAALGPC/xhBQAAACBj SFJNAAB6JgAAgIQAAPoAAACA6AAAdTAAAOpgAAA6mAAAF3CculE8AAAADFBMVEWYX16GWlrXyL7/ //9u4OxpAAAAAWJLR0QDEQxM8gAAAAd0SU1FB+QLHQkrEYezq3MAAAGGSURBVCjPPZHBattAEIZn hRWoTq6Ie/ApFAphnkIJOfkkjMYUnXps9RSycUrYUxHJxaeVcMzqf8rOyEoEy+ynf/bfnRkiopWU jn4yoHtKpSLa4APKwv2awUn65H6oRAU5J9vzohWFilwh3C/om8JXSssaozp4hQeRBuPScQZalkth jAXFLcinRAZJuAUhFApxwW0KindPB31JDrcxKFSAfynZIPO4NBr0npgioFsHoG8ofGnAr2sg0obC /QaH56YDpTWFZI3Qc76XiomyDuCXf2QGlF2sLI+pOH4HzsdE9xe64xF4/n1ok9NAAyIjfcwPf7sT 6W3Ze0FAWNUUAR/shBmArxs/wfzFP67+BIyioIcw6NqLpsXBwOe4MYiDisPRpjClmYHjq1vQpkep QI39TeD9SrtTGyzhu7Oe2QJHLd+/2gt2Wg3axL/ZsHRGe27Zv+0M1OE72LeWJipf5ueRbCe4NkR2 FthP9Yg6oOfTVTGHPa9nUIf+vp5hih/K5JDPUFm0O/EfFb0JCzV+bpUAAAAldEVYdGRhdGU6Y3Jl YXRlADIwMjAtMTEtMjlUMDk6NDM6MTcrMDA6MDBiKL+MAAAAJXRFWHRkYXRlOm1vZGlmeQAyMDIw LTExLTI5VDA5OjQzOjE3KzAwOjAwE3UHMAAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-Now-Playing: Victor Uwaifo And The Titibitis's _Nigeria 70 (No Wahala: Highlife, Afro-Funk & Juju 1973-1987)_: "Iziegbe (Ekassa No. 70)" Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2020 11:30:48 +0100 In-Reply-To: <834kl9oqt1.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 28 Nov 2020 09:59:06 +0200") Message-ID: <875z5oh2uf.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Eli Zaretskii writes: > It makes no sense to me, sorry. It makes sense to me, both from a simplicity perspective (as a way to keep track of which files have been converted) and from a reliability perspective (we get testing to ensure that, indeed, there's [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, Andy Moreton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Eli Zaretskii writes: > It makes no sense to me, sorry. It makes sense to me, both from a simplicity perspective (as a way to keep track of which files have been converted) and from a reliability perspective (we get testing to ensure that, indeed, there's no problem with having these files be lexically bound). I don't see why you object to the proposed patch. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Dec 02 08:51:26 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 2 Dec 2020 13:51:26 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34748 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kkSXW-0006u7-48 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2020 08:51:26 -0500 Received: from mail-pf1-f180.google.com ([209.85.210.180]:46752) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kkSXU-0006tr-JF for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 02 Dec 2020 08:51:25 -0500 Received: by mail-pf1-f180.google.com with SMTP id s21so1266741pfu.13 for <44854@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 02 Dec 2020 05:51:24 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=5PwM/o58lG5Ye0d1bsp0TTiCdCiMa3iFa4f5m/w2pds=; b=LdJ+k0DqT9ktQKiVBWiq5UdYdV3fbjkyW6o6rw43YbCdTvFYx4eHve8x+SJv5nHxMH FstrHm7uXqVqbXHvgZfF9z5KZZoAx/pWWM5cyyiVqk+xNe46ookdzpY/fcbkRNM0bV4X GnfL8Wb6wAxdBFTSOzdU4kDNqdvpiXNs7DssVL0nAfWtujxnAHIXlTPW3Mkosb5rUcg6 z2IfpLLSrhJQv4NeWrM7/7VcfW3qcJG1TpeFkUUt97FFDKYSqdWNZYNUjIq5nr2OlTNc 93jjHJE9lYlOICa9j3lE2YAlkjImB/UCYtUijP1r33iZinhx5IXaYgsYJXCHF1qM/1O0 sdAw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=5PwM/o58lG5Ye0d1bsp0TTiCdCiMa3iFa4f5m/w2pds=; b=rUoqLrd+SNO2OrLEfCXrGops+nfi32APf6tv6P7sYTQIftaxXLk488YbNCrv+f40LU BGUwT6CidHsdyBinzS4vsDvM+DdzLftFM7udd6eLRlgCPFO1D4gM+xvXwySONRrpJ/Cx k4L4QgIB4qQ4j8nDBL2Vv/vSxIn3lPVuVUE9xPx7SBWsDZYrDZ8sQmpnyv1E4RXwJY5r qydpbmwecM5Gb37+LvduQXafrWCKkDI2HDpCXR+cvE0lLn0F4pSyrSrYOD4OIr5NREJQ Oo7Bg+TqMHQo7JoblDSALkt2RYzLtQ5nFzc20qs6ql+JPMwFowQlvHGIEmG6PyK15T7I 5gWg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530j1OR9ZytXDhigwfH95t6GXMhMAe1uBHtsfK5OSzWJm3ifZTZW hn4Va8w6SO6cBTVq/0coQ+KvGCthXocMo1jmh98= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw9WwzR29cmBLsRIHPtkJaRGzwcbHOEBvUcO2ygp5miiAbldvMgulC8W+GzjCQkIrCgRuZThBTWqkZ3xkGZI3Y= X-Received: by 2002:a63:7d5d:: with SMTP id m29mr1553931pgn.345.1606917078720; Wed, 02 Dec 2020 05:51:18 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 2 Dec 2020 07:51:18 -0600 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <834kl9oqt1.fsf@gnu.org> References: <837dqatsjd.fsf@gnu.org> <83360ytqk3.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9scmb.fsf@gnu.org> <83eekhs5sj.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6v5s3e3.fsf@gnu.org> <837dq9s12u.fsf@gnu.org> <83wny9qj0j.fsf@gnu.org> <83o8jkqkr3.fsf@gnu.org> <868samwhk0.fsf@gmail.com> <834kl9oqt1.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 2 Dec 2020 07:51:18 -0600 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files To: Eli Zaretskii , Andy Moreton Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Eli Zaretskii writes: >> If adding a lexical-binding tag has no effect on the autoload files >> (other than making them a few bytes larger), then it should be of no >> consequence. > > The additional code in autoload.el is such a consequence, if nothing > else. It's a one line patch. > That is an advantage too small to justify the change. Skipping files > that all match a simple wildcard pattern is easy. There are only small benefits to adding this, sure. But there seem to be absolutely no benefits to be had from not adding it. On the contrary, you seem to agree that it requires us to do extra work. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 31 00:40:16 2020 Received: (at 44854) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Dec 2020 05:40:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51716 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kuqh6-0000X7-4O for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2020 00:40:16 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:44754) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kuqh3-0000Wm-8M for 44854@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2020 00:40:14 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=+k8U38fJZTXxROYHiE1aCBVcevAO1K24BG3lUZglHlA=; b=NNEnIeHpa8qMfjST/lfEGkHZVB bM3LzQ0CSKSaUI5i6a4YlNh0qLyHfo/mQJgHWzdb0NzBk8aIz4KS4OMf2cHySrG5Ke3UcSYBdNR4z x9kaeGpaz7V++zapsbMbnAKwGTGW3wfamYmd24TGV9alO0ACd+Dm35eF7LxN/6AWaqO8=; Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=xo) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kuqgj-00030u-UE; Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:40:06 +0100 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen To: Stefan Kangas Subject: Re: bug#44854: [PATCH] Add lexical-binding cookie to autoload files References: X-Now-Playing: Talk Talk's _The Party's Over_: "Have You Heard The News?" Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:39:52 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Tue, 24 Nov 2020 11:34:04 -0800") Message-ID: <874kk2mt3r.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: Stefan Kangas writes: > Does anyone have any objections to, or see any problems with adding the > lexical-binding cookie to autoload files, as in the attached patch? > > I've tested it, and it works just fine here. Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 44854 Cc: 44854@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Stefan Kangas writes: > Does anyone have any objections to, or see any problems with adding the > lexical-binding cookie to autoload files, as in the attached patch? > > I've tested it, and it works just fine here. There were objections, but two out of three maintainers were for it, so I'm now pushing this to Emacs 28 (after checking that a "make bootstrap" works fine, as expected). -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Dec 31 00:40:25 2020 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 31 Dec 2020 05:40:25 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51719 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kuqhF-0000XU-Cb for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2020 00:40:25 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]:44766) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kuqh8-0000Wx-Bd for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2020 00:40:18 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Subject:From:To:Message-Id:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=UCPJsd846xmYD1gOqadH74pRtkZoi2cqwdfW1nrt+X0=; b=Oz5ymWH5Lhr7tR1Km93jeOuY3e Hi2iAkLU/JDZLnUwBll2pTOPojJE2LbJZVLz8BAPhlaN1rdQpN+UC0g+RZ2jmckaU/w62KG0J+uGF tjnNuyKbo7Z9RiSYrvjkx5HkGv2lhfPodtXiuDcvSMDriOGpS6zq6onzmmz/fXqFe/Hw=; Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=xo) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kuqh0-00031Q-Qv for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:40:12 +0100 Date: Thu, 31 Dec 2020 06:40:09 +0100 Message-Id: <8735zmmt3a.fsf@gnus.org> To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Subject: control message for bug #44854 X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: tags 44854 fixed close 44854 28.1 quit Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) tags 44854 fixed close 44854 28.1 quit From unknown Thu Aug 14 17:29:15 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2021 12:24:08 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator