[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: What's the equivalent of `boundp' for lexical variables?
|
From: |
Po Lu |
|
Subject: |
Re: What's the equivalent of `boundp' for lexical variables? |
|
Date: |
Sun, 28 Jan 2024 13:28:11 +0800 |
|
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:
> Lexical variables are manipulated by their names, symbols which refer to
> them.
>
> Thanks for being so helpful. Maybe, just maybe, instead of insisting on
> being pedantically correct, you might try to give the poster information
> which would be useful to him.
I think Andrea's point was that it's not possible. Take the scenario
where such a lexical boundp is being called with an argument passed by a
caller, rather than a quoted symbol whose value can be associated with a
local binding during compilation. By the time the code is
byte-compiled, the relations between symbol names and positions on the
stack available to the compiler will have been lost, and would not be
available to boundp either way.
Re: What's the equivalent of `boundp' for lexical variables?, tomas, 2024/01/27