bug#30423: 2018-01-25; [patch] flymake support

[Mosè Giordano]

Hi Alex,

thanks again for your contribution.  I think it's fine in principle to
support Flymake, as long as this doesn't introduce dependence on
external packages.  We strive to keep dependencies as low as possible.

2018-02-11 19:06 GMT+01:00 Alex Branham <address@hidden>:
> Flymake got a major rewrite in Emacs 26, the attached patch adds support for 
> this in latex.el. Users can enable it by calling adding flymake-mode to 
> LaTeX-mode-hook.
>
>
>
> From 0b8eeebd01d0ed25823d4f40a7ab3cff0d150b8f Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Alex Branham <address@hidden>
> Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2018 11:54:09 -0600
> Subject: [PATCH] Support flymake in Emacs 26+ using chktex
>
> ---
>  latex.el | 73 
> +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
>  1 file changed, 72 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/latex.el b/latex.el
> index c2d8a4ca..e3792faf 100644
> --- a/latex.el
> +++ b/latex.el
> @@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
> -;;; latex.el --- Support for LaTeX documents.
> +;;; latex.el --- Support for LaTeX documents.  -*- lexical-binding: t; -*-

I'm concerned by this change.  We haven't used lexical binding so far
because we used to support very old Emacsens.  While this change may
be desirable, I've the feeling that AUCTeX relies on dynamic binding.
I've opened a ticket as a memo for anyone willing to work on it:
https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=30484.

Does your patch fundamentally rely on lexical binding or can work also
with dynamic binding?

In addition, I'm not sure latex.el is the right place for this.  The
file contains only stuff for editing LaTeX documents.  For example,
support for ispell is in its own module, required by latex.el.  What
other people thinks about this?

Bye,
Mosè