On Tue, May 09 2006, Richard Stallman wrote:
> > | This variable is safe to use as a file local variable only if its
> value
> > | satisfies the predicate `#[(x) [BYTE-CODE stripped] [x (t nil
> shared dwim)] 2]'.
>
> Why is the predicate a bytecode, instead of a symbol whose
> function definition is a bytecode?
The predicate is a lambda expression which was bytecomplied [I'm not
sure if this is what you asked for]. I gave a recipe to reproduce in
my first mail. FWIW, if I quote[1] the lambda expression in my
recipe, I get the expected result:
,----[ <f1> v rs-foo RET ]
| This variable is safe to use as a file local variable only if its value
| satisfies the predicate `(lambda (x) (or (stringp x) (member x (quote (t nil
shared dwim)))))'.
`----
On Mon, May 08 2006, Dan Nicolaescu wrote:
> I am not sure what to do in this situation. Should we print the
> bytecode? A disassembly of the bytecode (not very useful)?
> Or nothing?
>
> Opinions?
Printing the bytecode looks like a bug from the user's POV; and it
isn't useful.
Bye, Reiner.
[1]
(defvar rs-foo nil)
(put 'rs-foo 'safe-local-variable
;; Quoted lambda expression:
'(lambda (x)
(or (stringp x)
(member x (quote (t nil shared dwim))))))
--
,,,
(o o)
---ooO-(_)-Ooo--- | PGP key available | http://rsteib.home.pages.de/
_______________________________________________
emacs-pretest-bug mailing list
emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
