From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: christopher@librehacker.com, rms@gnu.org, drew.adams@oracle.com,
74261@debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#74261: 30.0.92; Remove modeline warning for explicit uses of dynamic binding
Date: Wed, 1 Jan 2025 20:05:02 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CADwFkmnx+bQ-W5Z4rybtvezZuZTsPKTdxGz4UvPj4GVSDvteUw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <864j3relxq.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 28 Nov 2024 11:40:01 +0200")
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
>> Cc: christopher@librehacker.com, drew.adams@oracle.com,
>> 74261@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2024 23:54:25 -0500
>>
>> > > But I think it is useful to show this warning when person A looks at
>> > > person B's file. Person A is likely to assume the file use lexical
>> > > binding, when just about all files do so; therefore, it is useful to
>> > > inform A that this file makes the unusual choice.
>>
>> > That could be the case, yes.
>>
>> > However, another way of looking at such situation is that if the
>> > author (person B) decided the file should use dynamic scoping, that's
>> > "good enough" for person A.
>>
>> I think this sentence may have changed the question unintentionally.
>> "That's good enough for A" means "A should not object to what B
>> decided". In that sense, think B's addition of he file variable often
>> _should_ be good enough for A.
>>
>> But the question we were discussing is not whether A has a right to
>> object to B's decision. It is whether A is aware of B's decision for
>> that file. The warning will help make A aware of it.
>
> What I meant was that "good enough" here means A should not be
> bothered or made aware.
>
>> For example, assume that person B is
>> > Emacs maintainers, and the file is part of Emacs.
>>
>> I think it will be useful to warn A that the file is set up to specify
>> dynamic binding.
>
> I tried to make the point that whether it is useful depends on the
> POV.
FWIW, I think Richard's argument here is convincing, so I'd personally
lean towards closing this bug as wontfix.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-02 2:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-11-08 15:33 bug#74261: 30.0.92; Remove modeline warning for explicit uses of dynamic binding Christopher Howard
2024-11-08 18:05 ` Drew Adams via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors
2024-11-11 5:13 ` Richard Stallman
2024-11-11 12:26 ` Eli Zaretskii
2024-11-25 4:32 ` Richard Stallman
2024-11-25 12:20 ` Eli Zaretskii
2024-11-28 4:54 ` Richard Stallman
2024-11-28 9:40 ` Eli Zaretskii
2025-01-02 2:05 ` Stefan Kangas [this message]
2025-01-02 6:16 ` Eli Zaretskii
2025-01-02 6:49 ` Stefan Kangas
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=CADwFkmnx+bQ-W5Z4rybtvezZuZTsPKTdxGz4UvPj4GVSDvteUw@mail.gmail.com \
--to=stefankangas@gmail.com \
--cc=74261@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=christopher@librehacker.com \
--cc=drew.adams@oracle.com \
--cc=eliz@gnu.org \
--cc=rms@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).