Re: [PATCH] Buffer-local process environments

[Augusto Stoffel <arstoffel@gmail.com>]

On Sat, 28 Aug 2021 at 10:05, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:

> Michael Albinus [2021-08-28 15:18:56] wrote:
>> Augusto Stoffel <arstoffel@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>> W/o further reading, this cannot be right. Elements of
>>>> `process-environment' have always the syntax "VAR=VALUE". You add only a
>>>> VALUE (`exec-path') in `bufferenv'. I understand your intention, using
>>>> `bufferenv' as transportation vehicle, but I believe this is
>>>> mis-designed, and good for trouble. If not now, then later.
>>>
>>> This is a temporary, lexical variable that is inaccessible to the user
>>> directly.  It's "destructured" again in the next hunk of the patch.
>>
>> I've seen this. But we shall avoid this dirty kind of programming, even
>> if it is internal only.
>
> I don't see anything dirty about it.

I agree, but since we are here we can discuss where we want to be
slightly wrong:

(1) when `process-environment' is local but `exec-path' isn't

or

(2) when `process-environment' or `exec-path' is nil

The first patch suffers from (1), the second from (2).

>
> I think you're just getting confused by the fact that the code uses
> `cons` to build a pair of a string and a list and you read it as adding
> add a string to the list.
>
> Maybe the confusion would be avoided by switching the two (i.e. use
> `(cons process-environment exec-path)`).
>
>
>         Stefan