Hi Agustin, Agustin Martin <agmar...@debian.org> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 10:34:05AM -0800, Xiyue Deng wrote: >> Hi Agustin, >> Agustin Martin <agmar...@debian.org> writes: >> >> > This code is supposed to run for both Emacs and XEmacs, which seems not to >> > have lexical binding. Since code should not use lexical-binding for that >> > reason, first line should probably default to nil (disabled) >> > >> > ;; -*- lexical-binding: nil -*- >> >> This is reasonable. But does "lexical-binding: t" take any effect in >> XEmacs? It may be OK if this is no-op in XEmacs so that it's only >> turned on for GNU Emacs. > > Hi, > > As long as no lexical binding is used, code should work the same in Emacs > and XEmacs. However, if lexical binding is ever used in this file, it will > not work as expected in XEmacs. I think setting it to nil should force the > same behavior in both Emacs and XEmacs. > Just trying to understand this better: does using "lexical-binding: t" already causing issue with the current XEmacs, or this is theoretical? If it's the former, how does it break XEmacs? I cannot seem to find any reference that XEmacs reacts to lexical-binding directives through searching. > Regards, > > -- > Agustin -- Regards, Xiyue Deng
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
