[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Strange eval-after-load
From: |
Richard Stallman |
Subject: |
Re: Strange eval-after-load |
Date: |
Fri, 07 Jul 2006 00:14:34 -0400 |
eval-after-load is conceptually the same as add-hook.
The point here is the difference between them. If you've decided to
treat that difference as unimportant, then of course you don't see
why I prefer one to the other.
Why is
using e-a-l worse than using LaTeX-mode-hook, for example?
The code in tex-mode.el explicitly runs LaTeX-mode-hook,
but it does not explicitly run the eval-after-load forms.
I cannot conceive of any (real) problems which might be caused by
(eval-after-load "edebug" '(def-edebug-spec c-point t))
I agree this does not cause any practical problem.
However, it is cleaner to use `declare'.
Also, I will move def-edebug-spec into subr.el, so that there
is no point in using eval-after-load here.
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, (continued)
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Johan Bockgård, 2006/07/04
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2006/07/04
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Richard Stallman, 2006/07/04
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Alan Mackenzie, 2006/07/04
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Nick Roberts, 2006/07/04
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Eli Zaretskii, 2006/07/04
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Alan Mackenzie, 2006/07/05
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, David Kastrup, 2006/07/05
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Alan Mackenzie, 2006/07/06
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, David Kastrup, 2006/07/06
- Re: Strange eval-after-load,
Richard Stallman <=
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Alan Mackenzie, 2006/07/07
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Richard Stallman, 2006/07/05
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Richard Stallman, 2006/07/05
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Alan Mackenzie, 2006/07/05
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Richard Stallman, 2006/07/03
- Re: Strange eval-after-load, Richard Stallman, 2006/07/03