From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stefan Monnier" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: How is the 21.2.90 pretest going? Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:13:26 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200210111913.g9BJDRJ16610@rum.cs.yale.edu> References: <15724.59040.131183.942957@mosaics.wustl.edu> <7458-Wed28Aug2002185639+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <7458-Wed28Aug2002201929+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <3405-Fri30Aug2002211052+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <8011-Sat31Aug2002090148+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <3791-Wed02Oct2002233515+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <200210081105.UAA17034@etlken.m17n.org> <200210091553.g99FrgH02192@rum.cs.yale.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1034363774 19659 127.0.0.1 (11 Oct 2002 19:16:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2002 19:16:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1805Gf-00056w-00 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 21:16:13 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18065o-0002Tu-00 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 22:09:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 1805Ee-0007O9-00; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:14:08 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 1805E1-0007LA-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:13:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 1805Dz-0007Kz-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:13:28 -0400 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 1805Dz-0007Kt-00; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:13:27 -0400 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g9BJDRJ16610; Fri, 11 Oct 2002 15:13:27 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: Richard Stallman Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:8531 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:8531 > > In those file I can read a comment like this: > > ;;; Note this definition must be at the end of the file, because > > ;;; `define-minor-mode' actually calls the mode-function if the > > ;;; associated variable is non-nil, which requires that all needed > > ;;; functions be already defined. [This is arguably a bug in d-m-m] > > ;;;###autoload > > (define-minor-mode auto-image-file-mode > > These comments have been obsolete since Emacs-21.1. > > I thought we decided define-minor-mode should still do this. > What makes the comments obsolete? They complained about the fact that the `define-minor-mode' code had to be at the end because it ran ( 1) if the variable was non-nil. I fixed it by using `eval-after-load' such that even if the `define-minor-mode' code is in the middle of the file, the ( 1) call is only made at the end of the file. Stefan