[Top][All Lists]

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

bug#31783: [PATCH v2] ido.el: define a special ido-fallback variable

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: bug#31783: [PATCH v2] ido.el: define a special ido-fallback variable
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 18:28:13 +0300

> From: Noam Postavsky <address@hidden>
> Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2018 08:19:03 -0400
> Cc: address@hidden
> Christophe Junke <address@hidden> writes:
> > I agree that it is simpler to rename the existing variable, and just
> > add a defvar declaration. Here is a different version of the patch
> > which does only this.
> > +;; Indicates which fallback command to call when ido-exit is 'fallback.
> > +(defvar ido-fallback nil)
> > -(defun ido-buffer-internal (method &optional fallback prompt default 
> > initial switch-cmd)
> > +(defun ido-buffer-internal (method &optional ido-fallback prompt default 
> > initial switch-cmd)
> I believe this doesn't work, function parameters are always lexically
> bound.  Compare
>     ; -*- lexical-binding: t -*-
>     (setq lexical-binding t) ; for use in *scratch*
>     (defvar x nil)
>     (disassemble (lambda (x y)
>                    (+ x y)))
>     (let ((x 1))
>       (disassemble (lambda (y)
>                      (+ x y))))
> So I think your first patch was fine.

There's some misunderstanding here, most probably mine.  Sorry; please
help me understand what am I missing.

The original report said that the problem was caused by using
lexical-binding in ido.el, so I proposed to defvar the offending
variable to make it dynamically bound, which is the boilerplate
solution for all such problems.  I thought that was all that was
needed, and I definitely didn't suggest to rename anything.

What did I miss?

reply via email to

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