From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tassilo Horn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: general lazy list facility for Emacs Lisp? Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 08:26:49 +0100 Message-ID: <87r59xugg6.fsf@member.fsf.org> References: <87pqphswn3.fsf@lifelogs.com> <877hbpzsy8.fsf@member.fsf.org> <87oc51rcal.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87tyetfymt.fsf@member.fsf.org> <87pqphfyak.fsf@member.fsf.org> <87hbatfv4q.fsf@member.fsf.org> <87bp11604d.fsf@member.fsf.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1300951629 16573 80.91.229.12 (24 Mar 2011 07:27:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 07:27:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Ted Zlatanov , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 24 08:27:04 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2ewh-0008JJ-KO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 08:27:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51039 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q2ewg-0003nV-Ek for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 03:27:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=34801 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Q2ewX-0003l3-Fb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 03:26:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2ewV-0002Df-VA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 03:26:53 -0400 Original-Received: from deliver.uni-koblenz.de ([141.26.64.15]:19011) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Q2ewV-0002DM-NS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 03:26:51 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by deliver.uni-koblenz.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7263F7816F9C; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 08:26:50 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from deliver.uni-koblenz.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (deliver.uni-koblenz.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 05726-09; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 08:26:49 +0100 (CET) X-CHKRCPT: Envelopesender noch tassilo@member.fsf.org Original-Received: from thinkpad (tsdh.uni-koblenz.de [141.26.67.142]) by deliver.uni-koblenz.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC9147816F98; Thu, 24 Mar 2011 08:26:49 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Wed, 23 Mar 2011 17:51:05 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110016 (No Gnus v0.16) Emacs/24.0.9999 (gnu/linux) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at uni-koblenz.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-Received-From: 141.26.64.15 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:137627 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: Hi Stefan, > Note that the byte-compiler won't like the above. You'll want either > > (let ((x 1)) > (defalias 'lex-test (lambda (y) (+ x y)))) > > or > > (defalias 'lex-test (let ((x 1)) (lambda (y) (+ x y)))) > > or something like that. Yes, I know, just wanted to check if it works at all. >>> and will report issues if I find one in my daily use. >> Found one! C-h k lexical-binding RET errors. > > Hmm... works here. Strange. >> I've reported it, but the confirmation mail has not yet arrived. > > I'll wait for the precise report, then. Oh, I'll have to add that this happens for any describe command, no matter what I describe. First I get that error, but after quitting the debugger, I get the *Help* buffer anyway... >>> I guess, that there are many packages that won't work with >>> lexical-binding set to t, right? > > Indeed. Tho check the Elisp manual for hints about how to convert > (it's usually pretty easy). Great, I'll see if I can help with some patches for transitioning the packages I'm using most. >> Seems to be a false assumption. At least org and Gnus are running >> fine. > > I think you're misunderstanding your test, because I doubt either of > Gnus or Org would work with lexical-binding without any additional > modification. lexical-binding is a variable that applies to a > file/buffer. E.g. it affects the compiler but not the compiled code. Ah, ok. In the mean time, I've found out that Gnus does not build (byte-compile) at all with a lexical-binding set to t. Bye, Tassilo