From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: RE: Avoiding 'reference to free variable' warningswhilesplittingelisp source files Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 07:34:58 -0700 Message-ID: <1E2C13C6E7944065A290F6A90160273D@us.oracle.com> References: <20130323090800.172d8df4@gauss><34FC3C03F8024543AA455B46C30A3AE7@us.oracle.com> <514EC11C.6020203@easy-emacs.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1364135736 3980 80.91.229.3 (24 Mar 2013 14:35:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 24 Mar 2013 14:35:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Stefan Monnier' To: "=?iso-8859-1?Q?'Andreas_R=F6hler'?=" , Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 24 15:36:01 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 1UJm1e-0000VF-7I for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 15:35:58 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56327 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UJm1G-0005nv-K0 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 10:35:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49598) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UJm14-0005nc-DL for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 10:35:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UJm13-0006iM-GV for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 10:35:22 -0400 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:20832) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UJm13-0006i6-93 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 10:35:21 -0400 Original-Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id r2OEZFVN013521 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 24 Mar 2013 14:35:16 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt358.oracle.com (acsmt358.oracle.com [141.146.40.158]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r2OEZERR017314 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 24 Mar 2013 14:35:14 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt120.oracle.com (abhmt120.oracle.com [141.146.116.72]) by acsmt358.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id r2OEZDFg025066; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 09:35:13 -0500 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/71.202.147.44) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Sun, 24 Mar 2013 07:35:13 -0700 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 In-Reply-To: <514EC11C.6020203@easy-emacs.de> Thread-Index: Ac4obiYJvKMsuI3LSJK5mWP+bHDAxQALb93A X-Source-IP: ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 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:89715 Archived-At: > At the very case, as we may and must make an agreement how to > understand words, IMO Stefan's proposal is useful. > > What about to understand "define" in a wider sense, making > more comprehensive assigments, while "declare" is understood > as a beginning of a defining-process, undertaking its > initial part. > > Probably "initiate" would be es good a "declare", it's just > to agree a convention, a possibility. Sorry, I don't have anything particular to add to what I already wrote. As I said, I have no great objection to a replacement of "define/definition" everywhere" by "declare/declaration", if done consistently and with attention. It is tilting at windmills IMO, but go for it if you think it improves something. But see what I wrote earlier for a more nuanced response. If what I've written doesn't help you, please ignore it.