Re: What's the equivalent of `boundp' for lexical variables?

[Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com>]

Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:

> Lexical variables are manipulated by their names, symbols which refer to
> them.
>
> Thanks for being so helpful.  Maybe, just maybe, instead of insisting on
> being pedantically correct, you might try to give the poster information
> which would be useful to him.

I think Andrea's point was that it's not possible.  Take the scenario
where such a lexical boundp is being called with an argument passed by a
caller, rather than a quoted symbol whose value can be associated with a
local binding during compilation.  By the time the code is
byte-compiled, the relations between symbol names and positions on the
stack available to the compiler will have been lost, and would not be
available to boundp either way.