[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?
From: |
martin rudalics |
Subject: |
Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local? |
Date: |
Sun, 09 Dec 2007 14:02:18 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) |
> More specifically, the problem is to decide *when* to make a variable
> buffer-local. I.e. Setting the variable via `setq' should make it
> buffer-local, but setting it with `let' shouldn't.
Has this to be carved in stone? Why should with
(defvar foo 1)
(make-variable-buffer-local 'foo)
the form below not set the default value of foo
(let ((foo 2))
(setq-default foo 3))
and the following form
(progn
(setq foo 4)
(let ((foo 2))
(setq-default foo 3)))
set it? Isn't code depending on one or the other behavior silly anyway?
- Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/12/07
- Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?, Stefan Monnier, 2007/12/07
- Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/12/08
- Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?, Stefan Monnier, 2007/12/08
- Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/12/08
- Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?, Stefan Monnier, 2007/12/08
- Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2007/12/08
- Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?,
martin rudalics <=
- Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?, Stefan Monnier, 2007/12/10
- Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?, martin rudalics, 2007/12/11
- Re: Why is not end-of-defun-function buffer local?, Stefan Monnier, 2007/12/11