Re: Adding a DECLARE spec equivalent to DECLARE-FUNCTION

[Adam Porter]

Hi Basil,

Thanks for your thoughtful reply.

On 3/16/24 05:04, Basil L. Contovounesios wrote:

> My vote is for instead teaching the compiler to treat declare-function
> more like it treats defvar, in that the effect of declare-function
> should be made local to the current lexical scope.  [It is already
> possible to write this way, and I've been known to, but sadly the effect
> is global.]  This wish has been raised and agreed on here (at least in
> passing) before.
>
> This would reap all the benefits of points 1-4, as well as an additional
> one: that declare-function is lexically closer to the implementation
> through which the need for the declaration arises.  I think a
> declaration at the top of a function is more likely to be forgotten and
> become stale as the implementation changes.

You raise some good points.  I would be happy with that as well.

--Adam