1 files changed, 17 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/test/lisp/emacs-lisp/bytecomp-resources/nowarn-inline-after-defvar.el b/test/lisp/emacs-lisp/bytecomp-resources/nowarn-inline-after-defvar.el
new file mode 100644
index 00000000000..5582b2ab0ea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/test/lisp/emacs-lisp/bytecomp-resources/nowarn-inline-after-defvar.el
@@ -0,0 +1,17 @@
+;; -*- lexical-binding: t; -*-
+
+;; In this test, we try and make sure that inlined functions's code isn't
+;; mistakenly re-interpreted in the caller's context: we import an
+;; inlinable function from another file where `foo-var' is a normal
+;; lexical variable, and then call(inline) it in a function where
+;; `foo-var' is a dynamically-scoped variable.
+
+(require 'foo-inlinable
+         (expand-file-name "foo-inlinable.el"
+                           (file-name-directory
+                            (or byte-compile-current-file load-file-name))))
+
+(defvar foo-var)
+
+(defun foo-fun ()
+  (+ (foo-inlineable 5) 1))