From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#50195: [PATCH] Adding diary-offset, a diary-sexp offsetting another diary-sexp. Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 19:07:39 +0300 Message-ID: <835yvtv778.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87fsuychjr.fsf@ypei.me> <83mtp5vizs.fsf@gnu.org> <875yvtk9ud.fsf@gnus.org> <83fsuxvhih.fsf@gnu.org> <878s0p4kir.fsf@web.de> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="25904"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, hi@ypei.me, 50195@debbugs.gnu.org To: Michael Heerdegen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 25 18:08:10 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mIvRh-0006Vl-Ly for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 18:08:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34850 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIvRg-0007ZX-Lp for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:08:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36102) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIvRa-0007ZF-3A for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:08:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:35874) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIvRZ-0008E5-Rz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:08:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mIvRZ-0003v7-NJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:08:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 16:08:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 50195 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 50195-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B50195.162990767915058 (code B ref 50195); Wed, 25 Aug 2021 16:08:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 50195) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Aug 2021 16:07:59 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47420 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mIvRS-0003uh-IU for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:07:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48138) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mIvRN-0003uH-95 for 50195@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:07:53 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:52338) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIvRH-00081A-M1; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:07:43 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:3015 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mIvRE-0007l4-Dk; Wed, 25 Aug 2021 12:07:43 -0400 In-Reply-To: <878s0p4kir.fsf@web.de> (message from Michael Heerdegen on Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:22:04 +0200) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:212654 Archived-At: > From: Michael Heerdegen > Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , hi@ypei.me, 50195@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2021 17:22:04 +0200 > > > Ugh! Is it worth it? If we cannot convert these functions to use > > lexical-binding, maybe we should say lexical-binding: nil in the first > > line of the file, and remove all those gross kludges? > > That would not work, you would still get warnings about free variables. I don't understand. This code did compile under dynamic-binding, so what warnings did you have in mind? > This case is a bit special and not directly related to lexical-binding > because these variables are just not declared with `defvar' (and I think > we don't want to introduce global variables like `date'). You are saying this always emitted warnings?