[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Onwards to lexical binding (attempt 1)

From: Mosè Giordano
Subject: Re: Onwards to lexical binding (attempt 1)
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 2020 16:09:48 +0200

Hi Tassilo,

thank you so much for taking the time to look into this!

Running `make check` locally on this branch I get

    Files examined: 13
    Ran 42 tests, 35 results as expected, 4 unexpected, 3 skipped
    2 files contained unexpected results:
    make[1]: *** [Makefile:85: check-doit] Error 1

It's probably worth checking the failing tests, at least some of them
are related.


On Fri, 4 Sep 2020 at 17:37, Tassilo Horn <> wrote:
> Hi all,
> on the new branch lexical-binding-attempt-1, I've squashed all
> "reference to free variable" warnings in latex.el and context.el by
> declaring them properly with defvars and with a prefix, and changing all
> users.
> This affects in latex.el
>   LaTeX-done-mark
>   LaTeX-level
>   LaTeX-name
>   LaTeX-title
>   LaTeX-toc
> and in context.el
>   ConTeXt-done-mark
>   ConTeXt-level
>   ConTeXt-name
>   ConTeXt-title
>   ConTeXt-reference
> which were previously neither prefixed nor declared.
> Of course, that is an incompatible change which will break user
> LaTeX-section-hook functions which accessed those unprefixed variables.
> But if we want to go lexical-binding (which I think we should), there's
> no way around that.
> Of course, I did not test too much (and ConTeXt not at all), so it would
> be great if you could give it a whirl.  There are chances that I might
> have changed an occurrence which I shouldn't have.
> We still have such issues in tex.el with the variable `file' and some
> others.  If someone wants to take care of that in a similar vein, feel
> free to give it a shot.
> Bye,
> Tassilo

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]