Re: missing lexical-binding cookie warning when loading .el files

["Mattias Engdegård" <mattias.engdegard@gmail.com>]

4 maj 2024 kl. 11.24 skrev Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>:

> I see Mattias already installed something, without waiting for the
> discussion to come to conclusions.

Sorry, other people had started interfering in the code. I will implement the consensus, but it's much easier if nobody else carries out pet changes before even basic adjustments can be made.

>  . it hard-codes ".emacs" as the file for which we don't warn, thus
>    leaving the warning in effect for early-init files
>  . the init file can be named init.el or _emacs (with or without
>    .el), and the change doesn't handle that

Actually it hard-codes .emacs as a file for which we do warn, but I didn't think of _emacs -- sorry.

Anyway, my assumption was that we should warn about the user init file(s) and you seem to disagree. Here is my reasoning:

+ Init files often contain substantial amounts of hand-written code for which lexical-binding matters.
+ New Emacs-generated init files always include a lexical cookie.
- Old Emacs-generated init files did not include a lexical cookie when created.
- Some init files don't contain much actual Lisp code.

Not sure what the balance is. Which would you prefer, and why? I'm not deeply invested in either choice.

>  . there are files like recentf-save-file (default: ".recentf") or
>    abbrev-file-name (default: "abbrev_defs") and others, which should
>    also be exempt of this

Yes, any file not ending in .el are now exempt.

> I wish people would discuss such changes before committing them.

Sorry about that, and I will make sure it's something that we (you specifically included!) are satisfied with, even if it means removing the warning entirely.