Re: tex.el compiler warnings

[Arash Esbati]

Hi Tassilo,

Tassilo Horn <tsdh@gnu.org> writes:

> Arash Esbati <arash@gnu.org> writes:
>
> the defvars look good to me.

Thanks for checking.

> Why is that needed?  As far as I see, that function only complains about
> variables defined by AUCTeX itself which you can also defvar, no?

Yes, the complaints about free variables `TeX-*' vanish by defvar'ing
them.

> In TeX-pdf-tools-sync-view:
> tex.el:1187:11: Warning: reference to free variable ‘TeX-PDF-mode’
> tex.el:1191:12: Warning: reference to free variable
>     ‘TeX-source-correlate-mode’
> tex.el:1193:38: Warning: reference to free variable
>     ‘TeX-current-process-region-p’
> tex.el:1197:24: Warning: reference to free variable ‘file’
>
> Of course with the exception of the variable `file' set via dynamic
> scoping which is one hindrance for switching to lexical-binding and as
> such should produce a compiler warning.

Yep, `file' is the only warning which remains, defvar'ing doesn't help
here (lack of prefix warning)

> Maybe we should add a
>
>   (defvar TeX-file nil)
>
> and bind that in addition to the undeclared `file', make AUCTeX itself
> only use TeX-file (and update the docs), and eventually omit binding
> `file' in the mid-term future.

That would be fine with me, I can commit the defvar's only and omit the
`with-no-warnings' if you would cater for the rest :-)

> Same here.
>
> In TeX-evince-sync-view-1:
> tex.el:1221:43: Warning: reference to free variable ‘file’
> tex.el:1230:40: Warning: reference to free variable
>     ‘TeX-current-process-region-p’
>
> Ah, or is it complaining about the dbus functions?  I guess they are
> only available on GNU/Linux (and you didn't turn off dbus support).

My understanding here was `file' again and not dbus.

> But anyway, I would like to keep warnings about abusing dynamic scope
> such as the warning about `file' here.

I'd really like to see AUCTeX building clean.  Can we make a compromise?
If you can get rid of `file' complaints by changing the code, that would
be great.  Otherwise, we use `with-no-warnings' and add I'll add some
comments to tex.el (and latex.el and context.el) for functions where it
should be removed first once we move towards lexical-binding.

WDYT?

Best, Arash