Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Enable lexical binding in every source lisp file #827

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Aug 23, 2015

Conversation

deepfire
Copy link
Contributor

Resolve #815.

@deepfire
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note, how emacs 24.5.2 fails to detect some bindings as used.. Pretty amazed by the fact.

@deepfire
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gracjan, there was one, yes, in haskell-cabal-find-subsection.

@gracjan
Copy link
Contributor

gracjan commented Aug 22, 2015

Lets give this pull request 24h for other guys reading to chime in if they see anything wrong in here.

@gracjan gracjan changed the title Lexically yours -- #815 Enable lexical binding in every source lisp file Aug 22, 2015
@syohex
Copy link
Contributor

syohex commented Aug 22, 2015

First line should be package declaration by Emacs packaging convention. So first line should be as below.

 ;;; ghc-core.el --- Syntax highlighting module for GHC Core -*- lexical-binding: t -*-

Examples

@gracjan
Copy link
Contributor

gracjan commented Aug 23, 2015

@deepfire, can you amend your first commit so that it follows generally accepted practice pointed out by @syohex?

@deepfire
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gracjan, sure thing.

@deepfire
Copy link
Contributor Author

deepfire commented Aug 23, 2015 via email

gracjan added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 23, 2015
Enable lexical binding in every source lisp file
@gracjan gracjan merged commit ea977e9 into haskell:master Aug 23, 2015
@gracjan
Copy link
Contributor

gracjan commented Aug 23, 2015

Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants