return object;
}
\f
-/* Return true if SYMBOL currently has a let-binding
+/* Return true if SYMBOL's default currently has a let-binding
which was made in the buffer that is now current. */
bool
struct Lisp_Symbol *let_bound_symbol = XSYMBOL (specpdl_symbol (p));
eassert (let_bound_symbol->u.s.redirect != SYMBOL_VARALIAS);
if (symbol == let_bound_symbol
+ && p->kind != SPECPDL_LET_LOCAL /* bug#62419 */
&& EQ (specpdl_where (p), buf))
return 1;
}
(should (equal (string-trim (buffer-string))
expected-messages))))))))
+(defvar-local eval-test--local-var 'global)
+
+(ert-deftest eval-test--bug62419 ()
+ (with-temp-buffer
+ (setq eval-test--local-var 'first-local)
+ (let ((eval-test--local-var t))
+ (kill-local-variable 'eval-test--local-var)
+ (setq eval-test--local-var 'second-local)
+ (should (eq eval-test--local-var 'second-local)))
+ ;; FIXME: It's not completely clear if exiting the above `let'
+ ;; should restore the buffer-local binding to `first-local'
+ ;; (i.e. reset the value of the second buffer-local binding to the
+ ;; first's initial value) or should do nothing (on the principle that
+ ;; the first buffer-local binding doesn't exists any more so there's
+ ;; nothing to restore). I think both semantics make sense.
+ ;;(should (eq eval-test--local-var 'first-local))
+ )
+ (should (eq eval-test--local-var 'global)))
+
;;; eval-tests.el ends here