Subject: bug#66636: closed (Re: bug#66636: Move lexical-binding warning from checkdoc to byte-compiler)

From: [email-masked] (GNU bug Tracking System)
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2023 13:19:02 +0000

Your bug report

#66636: Move lexical-binding warning from checkdoc to byte-compiler

which was filed against the emacs package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to [email-masked].

-- 
66636: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=66636
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact [email-masked] with problems

Subject: Re: bug#66636: Move lexical-binding warning from checkdoc to byte-compiler
From: Mattias Engdegård <[email-masked]>
To: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Cc: Po Lu <[email-masked]>, Stefan Monnier <[email-masked]>, [email-masked], Stefan Kangas <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2023 15:17:22 +0200
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

21 okt. 2023 kl. 13.17 skrev Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>:

> If specifying lexical-binding:nil in the first line is the solution
> for those who want to keep dynamically-bound code, then yes, it should
> be definitely in NEWS, and probably also in the ELisp manual.

Agreed on both points. The patch has been pushed with that change to NEWS, and Elisp manual revisions are upcoming.  We are a bit behind on lexical-binding in the manual so it could do with some more work.

Thanks to everyone who commented!

Subject: Move lexical-binding warning from checkdoc to byte-compiler
From: Mattias Engdegård <[email-masked]>
To: Emacs Bug Report <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 13:48:21 +0200
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

The warning about a missing lexical-binding cookie rather belongs in the compiler than checkdoc, because it's not about documentation or style but code generation and ability to detect errors, both which are hindered by a missing cookie.

Moving the warning to the compiler also makes it more widely seen.