bug#81638: 32.0.50; flyspell-prog-text-faces type and semantics

Eli Zaretskii <[email protected]> writes:

> How is flyspell-prog-mode useful if you set that variable to nil?
> doesn't that basically make flyspell-prog-mode identical to
> flyspell-mode?

I have been writing a letter with LaTeX.  In LaTeX what I want to
spellcheck corresponds to a nil face property.  At least this has been
my setup of choice in the past.

Normal flyspell-mode seems to perform much better now in LaTeX than it
did years ago - but it still checks commented out parts and underlines
some LaTeX macro names there.  So it still seems that using
`flyspell-prog-mode' is a valid tools in such situations.  I get the
most convenient behavior with it.

> Also, if you want to tweak flyspell-prog-mode this way, why not use
> setq instead of setopt?  That option doesn't have any :set function,
> so the only reason to use setopt is to check the validity of the
> value, which you don't like, so...

So...

Because someone made file local variables be set with setopt internally.
This was not my choice.  I'm getting a lot of new warnings related to
buffer local variables since then.  See my past reports about type
mismatches - they all originated from file variables.


Michael.