From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Gauthier_=D6stervall?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: sending function arguments to recursive function calls Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 14:20:02 +0200 Message-ID: References: <0F54256BD7B94384AC4DDA919D502C20@us.oracle.com> <4D1DF48A7223443FA454C07B20B80E21@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1368793242 13646 80.91.229.3 (17 May 2013 12:20:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 17 May 2013 12:20:42 +0000 (UTC) To: Stefan Monnier , help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 17 14:20:41 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UdJeK-0008Gh-UC for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 May 2013 14:20:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49458 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UdJeK-00014z-CE for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 17 May 2013 08:20:40 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:53432) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UdJe7-00014V-6p for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 17 May 2013 08:20:30 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UdJe4-0007Zc-0s for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 17 May 2013 08:20:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wi0-x231.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::231]:64059) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UdJe3-0007ZR-R5 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 17 May 2013 08:20:23 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wi0-f177.google.com with SMTP id hr14so418069wib.4 for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 05:20:22 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references :from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=G+B6IX73QYiggSw0nc5qjZwMKIhY2cJ9N4JKtJDAeSE=; b=I5SGGVuMNcuY3CpOucsZTiV3AxeF2Nw+FEWfZIVhs1gSAf+i6X/47EkPyaImNDLC3K d0asftXqWnWqNexsKfGUifrDM7pfq9WPs3CwLIhfG0+uCeDUyO9T2JFh3d5AJoVEsFBQ uQ4hR0hVOYsWc+cNxjZ2F8SyB7AaGZPrRkLaGBwnsRHpirIhXvr/d+Rf0+arGUbUM9QL 1TA4/Vl6jrw4lCyHEr07ShdokDP2fdKs8f9jJSWNBNQuXOePDumKiTWv31AwMk/9JxIv P9KXI9E503XjCwZJ+y75jPC7zcTUdI4geLL+Mwi6iiF5FSwXXZoHpUlxajRwtKNG5yMX uH5w== X-Received: by 10.180.198.49 with SMTP id iz17mr33746903wic.19.1368793222593; Fri, 17 May 2013 05:20:22 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.180.97.104 with HTTP; Fri, 17 May 2013 05:20:02 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [83.248.165.178] In-Reply-To: X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkQyPZRbyDgX7YbkTFNLXQZSKtVVNkYXz6+z2nBrdZ60KW4CbGyoRmR8Ru5uHRLjaIaPSCA X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c05::231 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:90871 Archived-At: On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote: > That's the question that the byte-compiler can't answer: maybe they > really weren't used (so you can remove them), or maybe they were used > elsewhere via dynamic scoping (in which case you need to add a (defvar > ) to force the use of dynamic scoping for this variable). All the variables that the byte-compiler complained about were defined in the first parameter of a let or a let* expression. My understanding of let and let* is that the first parameter defines local variables to be used in the second parameter (or later in the first parameter in the case of let*). The unused variables I had to remove were not referenced in the last parameter of the let or let* (nor later in the first parameter of let*), so I assumed they were not used anywhere. Is there a way that such variables may be used elsewhere (via dynamic scoping)? If yes, how? Couldn't it be the case only if they were defined with setq (so called free variables)?