GNU bug report logs - #77883
31.0.50; C-c C-e in *scratch* generates a missing lexical binding cookie warning

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#77883: closed (31.0.50; C-c C-e in *scratch* generates a
 missing lexical binding cookie warning)
Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 13:29:02 +0000

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

Your message dated Sat, 03 May 2025 16:28:43 +0300
with message-id <86tt61j01g.fsf <at> gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#77883: 31.0.50; C-c C-e in *scratch* generates a missing lexical binding cookie warning
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #77883,
regarding 31.0.50; C-c C-e in *scratch* generates a missing lexical binding cookie warning
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
77883: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=77883
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

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

From: Sean Whitton <spwhitton <at> spwhitton.name>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 31.0.50; C-c C-e in *scratch* generates a missing lexical binding
 cookie warning
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2025 10:35:42 +0800

Hello,

Found another case.

*scratch* should probably remain under the dynamic binding dialect of
Emacs Lisp until and unless we switch the default.

-- 
Sean Whitton

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

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: michael_heerdegen <at> web.de, 77883-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
 spwhitton <at> spwhitton.name
Subject: Re: bug#77883: 31.0.50; C-c C-e in *scratch* generates a missing
 lexical binding cookie warning
Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 16:28:43 +0300

> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: michael_heerdegen <at> web.de,  spwhitton <at> spwhitton.name,  77883 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 03 May 2025 09:12:32 -0400
> 
> > I prefer the latter solution, as it sounds to me less ad-hoc.  Any
> > objections to installing the below on the master branch?
> 
> LGTM.

Thanks, installed on master, and closing the bug.

> > -settings in the buffer, and if there is no such setting, the buffer
> > -will be evaluated without lexical binding.
> > +settings in the buffer; if there is no such setting, and the
> > +buffer-local value of the variable is nil, the buffer will be
> > +evaluated without lexical binding.
> 
> BTW, this last point is not completely true any more: it depends
> on the `default-toplevel-value`.

Right, fixed.

Previous Next

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