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

> From: Michael Heerdegen <[email protected]>
> Cc: Stefan Monnier <[email protected]>,  Sean Whitton
>  <[email protected]>,  [email protected]
> Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2026 19:23:26 +0200
> 
> 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.

How about making a separate variant of flyspell-mode for these use
cases, then?  flyspell-prog-mode might be an approximation, but AFAIU
from what you are saying, it is not optimal, because you need to tweak
it in ways that was not meant to happen, and because LaTeX is not a
programming language anyway.  A new variant of flyspell would make
more sense, IMO.