Re: Blunderbuss ".dir-locals.el" raises everything in its path!!

[Stefan Monnier]

>> If the variable is set in both, we should be careful to say it's
>> "file-local" and not "dir-local".

> Sorry, I don't understand.  If the variable is set in both
> `file-local-variables-alist' and `(dir-local-variables-alist)',
> then it's "dir-local" and not "file-local".

No, if it's set both in dir-locals.el and in file-local, then it's
file-local.

>> The problem with that is that if the dir-local.el file changes between
>> the time you open the file and the C-h v, you'll get incorrect results.

> The main purpose of adding an information about .dir-locals.el in C-h v
> is to warn the user about a new dir-local mechanism that s?he might
> not be aware of.  This warning is less useful when the user already
> has dealt with dir-local.el files.

I know, but if you use a function like you have, you're reporting the
dir-locals that would be aplied if the file was re-opened at that point,
rather than the dir-locals that was in effect when the file was opened.

> Or do you think a new variable `dir-local-variables-alist'
> would be better?

Yes, we need to remember the dir-locals that were found when the file
was opened since they may disappear afterwards,


        Stefan