GNU bug report logs - #66636
Move lexical-binding warning from checkdoc to byte-compiler

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>
Subject: bug#66636: closed (Re: bug#66636: Move lexical-binding warning
 from checkdoc to byte-compiler)
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2023 13:19:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

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 66636 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

-- 
66636: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=66636
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Po Lu <luangruo <at> yahoo.com>, Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>,
 66636-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#66636: Move lexical-binding warning from checkdoc to
 byte-compiler
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2023 15:17:22 +0200

21 okt. 2023 kl. 13.17 skrev Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>:

> 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!

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Mattias Engdegård <mattias.engdegard <at> gmail.com>
To: Emacs Bug Report <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Move lexical-binding warning from checkdoc to byte-compiler
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2023 13:48:21 +0200

[Message part 4 (text/plain, inline)]

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.

[0001-Move-lexical-binding-warning-from-checkdoc-to-byte-c.patch (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.