From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#12532: 24.2.50; wrong results using byte-compile-file with lexical-binding Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:22:48 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1348863837 11294 80.91.229.3 (28 Sep 2012 20:23:57 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 20:23:57 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 12532@debbugs.gnu.org To: Sergey Vinokurov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 28 22:24:02 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1THh6N-000140-QS for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 22:23:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55609 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1THh6I-0007Lq-EE for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:23:54 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:37613) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1THh6G-0007Lg-64 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:23:52 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1THh6F-0003uL-8R for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:23:52 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:51407) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1THh6F-0003uH-5H for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:23:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1THh6Q-0001D7-0K for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:24:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 20:24:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 12532 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 12532-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B12532.13488637844577 (code B ref 12532); Fri, 28 Sep 2012 20:24:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 12532) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Sep 2012 20:23:04 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60953 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1THh5T-0001Bh-Ll for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:23:04 -0400 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:35581) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1THh5Q-0001B6-ME; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:23:01 -0400 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q8SKMmrS008520; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:22:48 -0400 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 6FE11B40A1; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 16:22:48 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Sergey Vinokurov's message of "Fri, 28 Sep 2012 14:36:34 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV4355=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.2.0.9309 : core <4355> : streams <827623> : uri <1230215> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 2) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:64990 Archived-At: tags 12532 notabug thanks > On trunk Emacs compiling function with argument names declared as > special somewhere, like mode-name, resulting function produced by > byte-compile-file is different from function obtained by evaluating > definition or byte-compiling that definition in buffer. This code uses > all three possibilities and reports evaluating results Yes. Using special variables as function arguments is not supported for lexical-binding code. So the behavior can change according to the phase of the moon. That's also why the byte-compiler warns you that test12592_hY.el:2:1:Warning: Argument *myvar* is not a lexical variable Stefan