Search Results
| Search type | Search syntax |
|---|---|
| Tags | [tag] |
| Exact | "words here" |
| Author |
user:1234 user:me (yours) |
| Score |
score:3 (3+) score:0 (none) |
| Answers |
answers:3 (3+) answers:0 (none) isaccepted:yes hasaccepted:no inquestion:1234 |
| Views | views:250 |
| Code | code:"if (foo != bar)" |
| Sections |
title:apples body:"apples oranges" |
| URL | url:"*.example.com" |
| Saves | in:saves |
| Status |
closed:yes duplicate:no migrated:no wiki:no |
| Types |
is:question is:answer |
| Exclude |
-[tag] -apples |
| For more details on advanced search visit our help page | |
Results tagged with lexical-binding
Search options answers only
not deleted
user 1979
1
vote
byte-compile and lexical-binding
The lexical-binding is a setting that by-and-large operates at compile-time and not at run-time (more specifically, it applies to code that's being manipulated rather than code that's being executed). …
- 26.7k
3
votes
How to avoid use of `lexical-let`
Your example is likely not representative of the actual code you're using, but a good solution might be to create the closure in the macro and return the closure, instead of returning code which may o …
- 26.7k
10
votes
Accepted
Defun inside let with lexical binding gives byte-compile warning "the function is not known ...
The byte-compiler's way to decide whether a function will be defined or not is very "naive" and gets fooled even in your "obvious" case.
But you can write it in a way that lets the compiler understand …
- 26.7k