From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#18059: 24.3.92; defvar and special variables Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2018 16:15:14 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <29316879-292c-4528-8bf7-57046f3730b7@default> References: <87ha2c7lxy.fsf@web.de> <87mv0gbq33.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <87y3k0bdm9.fsf@web.de> <87inb4bbse.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <873727bkud.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <87efloa000.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <87fu5y53w5.fsf@gmail.com> <87371xlpmw.fsf@web.de> <87lgf216oc.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1520554452 17143 195.159.176.226 (9 Mar 2018 00:14:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Mar 2018 00:14:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Michael Heerdegen , 18059@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier To: Noam Postavsky Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 09 01:14:07 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eu5fi-0004MH-TV for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2018 01:14:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42560 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eu5hl-0000eo-Ls for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2018 19:16:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47858) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eu5hf-0000ed-9p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2018 19:16:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eu5ha-0001p7-Aa for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2018 19:16:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:43700) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eu5ha-0001ox-5I for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2018 19:16:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eu5hZ-00031z-SB for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2018 19:16:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Drew Adams Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2018 00:16:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 18059 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 18059-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B18059.152055452711600 (code B ref 18059); Fri, 09 Mar 2018 00:16:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 18059) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Mar 2018 00:15:27 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51597 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eu5h1-000312-CZ for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2018 19:15:27 -0500 Original-Received: from aserp2120.oracle.com ([141.146.126.78]:46570) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eu5gz-00030n-Qa for 18059@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 08 Mar 2018 19:15:26 -0500 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (aserp2120.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by aserp2120.oracle.com (8.16.0.22/8.16.0.22) with SMTP id w290CfRe100833; Fri, 9 Mar 2018 00:15:19 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2017-10-26; bh=0R69UvelpL4g8QUJbl1qxm/J6CJk6USmDK4+MYXiKWo=; b=oQ4cjY7/lb/dJcO7hAh1njhUiz8SBLwPyLClB16edMMQ4/YdGCtGl6YKZbM5YS2W2C3Q IkXrFfQlG14wRX2jP9apGdsM2UehOlYvaUUFWzBWrzGGA9NCwcD3SMgBtqGD/avIGcpv so+dLHjF1NiXHdfvU7sWk5fnMOVnm7dCN1ZFaJhpuofSHsSBjM6eTpzMtOKqc4tZbdml pyJtNk2jaEx5BsBCZ1VInb6phAgbyMhesVP4T2Mb2D+vm20RJOTKI4vLt39o7SteigRT F9drtEaLhVt1CsCzyOdrHrqH8UTCd/GWKCYR3hN8LeFGZ7QtOanSaJHNg3GW1QbU3Oqh Aw== Original-Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by aserp2120.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2gkfe0r0r4-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 09 Mar 2018 00:15:19 +0000 Original-Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id w290FIdA008865 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 9 Mar 2018 00:15:18 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id w290FFoR003593; Fri, 9 Mar 2018 00:15:15 GMT In-Reply-To: <87lgf216oc.fsf@gmail.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.4666.0 (x86)] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=5900 definitions=8826 signatures=668687 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1711220000 definitions=main-1803090001 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:144058 Archived-At: > >> Not to mention lots of vacuous defvars to quiet the byte-compiler: > >> > >> (unless (> emacs-major-version 22) > >> (defvar display-buffer-reuse-frames)) > > > > So here, what is the use of putting it below the toplevel? Why don't > > you just write > > > > (defvar display-buffer-reuse-frames) ; For Emacs 22 and earlier. >=20 > Hey Drew, I am actually interested in your answer to this question, > sorry if it came across as rhetorical. I didn't take it wrong, Noam; don't worry. I don't have a good answer, in terms of "I _need_ to do it this way because otherwise...". My arguments: 1. Some users _will_ do it this way. Nothing says they shouldn't. If that means they lose out on some functionality then they will need to know that. And some users will have already done it, so they will need to change. Is that really necessary? Should it be? What's the real need here? 2. As one user, I _prefer_ to do it the way I do it, for facility of code maintenance, i.e., to document to myself which versions need what. Yes, I could do that using only comments (but I find this way clearer, as it's the same way I do it where it really matters). HTH - D.