From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Should lexical-let use let in the situation lexical-binding is t ? Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:18:43 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20120918192807.6a426ea58372355516a2ea50@cx4a.org> <20120922031824.e7f584613ca22d1a7ed32eba@cx4a.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1348262330 6085 80.91.229.3 (21 Sep 2012 21:18:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Sep 2012 21:18:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Tomohiro Matsuyama Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 21 23:18:55 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1TFAcg-0008NE-Pn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 23:18:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55882 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TFAcc-0005AQ-6e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:18:50 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:57400) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TFAca-0005AL-8V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:18:48 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TFAcZ-0008IA-DT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:18:48 -0400 Original-Received: from chene.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.20]:58435) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TFAcZ-0008I2-9F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:18:47 -0400 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by chene.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q8LLIhsD018836; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:18:43 -0400 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id D6C55B404D; Fri, 21 Sep 2012 17:18:43 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20120922031824.e7f584613ca22d1a7ed32eba@cx4a.org> (Tomohiro Matsuyama's message of "Sat, 22 Sep 2012 03:18:24 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-Received-From: 132.204.246.20 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:153446 Archived-At: > By the way, isn't it possible to check if the symbol is declared as special > or not by accessing declared_special field of the symbol? Yes, if the variable has been defvar'd already. But not if the variable's defvar is in the file we're compiling (and hence hasn't yet been evaluated), in which case the var will be in byte-compile-bound-variables instead (cf. byte-compile-not-lexical-var-p). Stefan