Re: defcustom standard value and byte-compilation

[Tassilo Horn]

"Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden> writes:

>  > I'd have no problems cutting support for emacs <23 or even <24, but
>  > cutting support for XEmacs is something which I'd prefer not to do
>  > without extremely good reasons although that would make life much
>  > more easy.
>
> Greatly appreciated!

You're welcome.

> BTW, at the time I write this, Uwe hasn't responded to what I told him
> on xemacs-beta, but I'm pretty sure his problem is that he loads
> tex.el (from AUCTeX) in his init file.

I'm not sure to which of Uwe's problems you are referring to.  He's had
tons of them but I think we resolved most if not all of them in the
meantime.  (Most were configuration issues on his side.)

> By default XEmacs loads customizations *after* init[1], so if Uwe used
> custom to set those variables, they were empty when the defcustom was
> encountered in tex.el.

Ah, yes, I think he had also a problem with TeX-style-path having a
non-standard value.  Maybe this has something to with the above although
I think he had that when he used GNU Emacs for testing and insisting not
to use one of the documented ways of installing AUCTeX.

>  > Yes, I know.  But having non-prefixed (defvar name) etc just looks
>  > so damn wrong.
>
> If these aren't used to communicate with non-AUCTeX applications, just
> rename them.  (I'm not sure if that is a wisecrack or a serious
> suggestion.)

You can never know.  I think at least reftex makes use of some of them
but that's under our control, too.  And some of them are exposed to user
configurations as well, e.g., entries of `TeX-expand-list' may assume
that `file' is bound to the file to be processed.  There are probably
others, too.

Bye,
Tassilo