Re: Safety of elisp-flymake-byte-compile (Was Re: [Emacs-diffs] scratch/allow-custom-load-paths)

[Stefan Monnier]

> This is orthonogal to the question right?  I think for the time being we
> can write some 'moderately-trusted-p (file)' function to hide that can
> of worms.

Indeed.
Cute worms, by the way.

>>> So as soon as I load eglot.el, or eglot.elc in the host Emacs, it would
>>> start working?
>> Right, or even as soon as eglot is in your load-path.
> Hmmm, there appears to be a contradiction here, or maybe I'm missing
> something.  Can you explain exactly what will happen if I C-u M-x
> byte-compile-file the eglot.el file?  That's the way I normally load .el
> files: I usually don't put their directories in my load path unless they
> have complicated dependencies, or I plan on keeping them in my config.

If it is in your load-history, then it also qualifies to be "trusted",
even if it's not in your load-path.

>>> At least, the way I understand your solution for the "safe/unsafe" macro
>>> problem it still doesn't seem to fix the fact that as soon as I type
>>> "(launch-nuke)" into some already loaded macro in eglot.el, nukes are
>>> potentially going to be launched by some unsuspecting macro-expansion
>>> down below.
>> Yup.  That's the problem with the use of trust as a proxy for safety.
> Yup x 2.  With Flymake and macro expansions it's like you trust someone

It's particularly serious when that someone is yourself, because
when you mess up you can't even point fingers.


        Stefan