From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#18059: 24.3.92; defvar and special variables Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:26:18 -0500 Message-ID: <87a7wgb6t1.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> References: <87ha2c7lxy.fsf@web.de> <87mv0gbq33.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <87y3k0bdm9.fsf@web.de> <87inb4bbse.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <878tc0l3ac.fsf@web.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1518315922 8704 195.159.176.226 (11 Feb 2018 02:25:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 02:25:22 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.90 (gnu/linux) Cc: 18059@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier To: Michael Heerdegen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 11 03:25:17 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 1ekhKH-0001HS-KS for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 11 Feb 2018 03:25:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36223 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ekhMH-0007T4-Ao for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:27:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35414) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ekhM9-0007S0-Tp for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:27:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ekhM7-0005Fy-1i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:27:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:57835) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ekhM6-0005Fd-Sz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:27:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ekhM6-0004jx-Fu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:27:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Noam Postavsky Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 02:27:02 +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=B18059.151831598918183 (code B ref 18059); Sun, 11 Feb 2018 02:27:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 18059) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Feb 2018 02:26:29 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37499 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ekhLZ-0004jD-Ji for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:26:29 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-io0-f171.google.com ([209.85.223.171]:36766) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ekhLW-0004iy-MB for 18059@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2018 21:26:27 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-io0-f171.google.com with SMTP id l17so13886281ioc.3 for <18059@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 10 Feb 2018 18:26:26 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=GfMSujpL/j03uvv8xRv5SKt5eUZZ7VcA9I43KTMuKiU=; b=vKXyLkZUE3EjVr0yumFFmh2UiYg8ilYNOB2DM5pEEK4ODzMfCp02x5Ai93XWTz651h vDy7qUDkXKLr7t5vpfRLD2N7TakNK3Q/kJCZgGTpuQI4zaI8CNRABFhhldgTNhiUOQNB 9QmpXAUTkjt5oDkDaPvAP800/tgXHEW+DgISRRxn4HeNEKVTH5j9oAZbMZ5zU1I92LEq IEEtFAz4ugAq2MWjRVl3QeUQyjsR/Qj66PLAy3CY/1ELKRtgZbxQCeN/IOz7PPPfafij wJJvsSu7Lgd8EuA2wzNWXHjs4ecgzMbBX50zeOu3tBUx1xN5XxVBIMWHWa/qlzaA3SzL mKiw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=GfMSujpL/j03uvv8xRv5SKt5eUZZ7VcA9I43KTMuKiU=; b=A4tFZ8ltQnrtIwl8qC+3E0KCAJYxQGF1DuWiiNdFMM5GfMJiM+sI1LXsFG8T+G9nox gmt4KitSX4SRzdbaXG1+IoTUUssMmnYVt3MjUFJ9qTTAowAmEiiAacuZL+QW/Y7b7ZZI 1tw+z92M4/sVlhEuiDLmr9Jq7pxElUtOfVVjgdNFKCrd2HIZ0Xep7Zyz4oNQ0/Z9kKlS d9imdtWFEwDBQhSKjUP3Sbj3L8pmieKo73Z3Kr00brB135TXaZXNJlpRreXx8rluyIOV eqOoPw4JuUDjSJeJf+KxiQ9QFPSvl8j8oYKUYB7R/9eWtdw7NKtss1RBapVctio1AA/D fkSw== X-Gm-Message-State: APf1xPB8hOVY6iAqnGXFmS+yKlraw6DOzS+eocI/RY3clWqgmydnOZ1r kmf0NCZZKc7K1qAwE+FKpiU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AH8x225/gI6MjErUbkrpDIfJSDuZHTrBbqC6SMJAIcTF5ONIvmvRuVlNxVzdnCKEStIeUzLK/vldOw== X-Received: by 10.107.56.66 with SMTP id f63mr9151739ioa.267.1518315980936; Sat, 10 Feb 2018 18:26:20 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from zebian (cbl-45-2-119-34.yyz.frontiernetworks.ca. [45.2.119.34]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id v2sm6627057iob.72.2018.02.10.18.26.19 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Sat, 10 Feb 2018 18:26:19 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <878tc0l3ac.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Sun, 11 Feb 2018 02:32:11 +0100") 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:143124 Archived-At: Michael Heerdegen writes: > Thanks for the examples. Maybe - and this is my personal opinion - such > examples in the manual would not be too bad. I find the issue hard to > understand without such examples, though it might be a secondary > subject. Yeah, it's just a bit tricky where to put them without cluttering up the main explanation with this fairly (IMO) niche use-case. >> I noticed doing (let () (defvar x)) seems to be the same as (progn >> (defvar x)), which may be a bug. > > I guess because the interpreter doesn't create a new lexical environment > in this case? But indeed it seems to contradict the doc. Although, maybe that means we should just change the doc. Stefan, thoughts?