Hi Nick, Nick Dokos <nicholas.do...@hp.com> writes:
> I'd suggest that that can be a source of bugs that would be > avoided with a compatibility macro. `org-labels' is an alias for `cl-labels' (when available) or `labels'. There is no need for a compatibility macro here, as the current code is compatible with both Emacs 23 and Emacs 24 -- and hopefully later versions of Emacs. The question is rather whether we want to be very strict and replace as much cl-* constructs as possible. Nicolas shown a way to let-bind functions recursively (which is simple and neat, by the way), so yes, I'd favor replacing org-labels in this case. Especially because the cl-labels and labels macros do not work exactly the same way. See labels' docstring: ... Like `cl-labels' except that the lexical scoping is handled via `lexical-let' rather than relying on `lexical-binding'. > But maybe the compatibility macro would be a bigger problem - I don't > know for sure. In particular, the file would need a periodic cleanup to > get rid of old cruft, but if it's a once-a-year-or-two occurrence, that > might not be too bad. Always good to know there are many people we can rely on to clean the old cruft :) -- Bastien
