Re: sending function arguments to recursive function calls

[Gauthier Östervall]

On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 4:55 PM, Stefan Monnier
<monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> That's the question that the byte-compiler can't answer: maybe they
> really weren't used (so you can remove them), or maybe they were used
> elsewhere via dynamic scoping (in which case you need to add a (defvar
> <var>) to force the use of dynamic scoping for this variable).

All the variables that the byte-compiler complained about were defined
in the first parameter of a let or a let* expression.

My understanding of let and let* is that the first parameter defines
local variables to be used in the second parameter (or later in the
first parameter in the case of let*).

The unused variables I had to remove were not referenced in the last
parameter of the let or let* (nor later in the first parameter of
let*), so I assumed they were not used anywhere.

Is there a way that such variables may be used elsewhere (via dynamic
scoping)? If yes, how?
Couldn't it be the case only if they were defined with setq (so called
free variables)?