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

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to