Re: Removing unloaded functions from auto-mode-alist.

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Andreas Schwab <schwab@suse.de> writes:

> Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>
>> I think the above is a good reason why "TeX-mode" and "LaTeX-mode"
>> belong to AUCTeX rather than to tex-mode.el.
>
> tex-mode.el is using TeX-mode since the beginning, and LaTeX-mode since
> 1986.

"Is using" is an exaggeration.  I checked out version 1.1 (from 1990),
and the only "uses" for it are the aliases.  I doubt that this has
ever been different (in spite of the following changelog entries), but
if somebody has older versions around, he can check this for
historical accuracy.

Even if at one time before 1990 it might have been the case that the
mode was not merely aliased, I doubt that pre-1990 compatibility is a
major concern nowadays.

> 1985-09-29  Richard M. Stallman  (rms@mit-prep)
>
> 	* tex-mode.el:
> 	New file, containing TeX-mode.
>
> 1986-08-28  Richard M. Stallman  (rms@prep)
>
> 	* loaddefs.el: Autoload plain-TeX-mode and LaTeX-mode.
> 	Define aliases for them.  Fix doc for TeX-mode.
>
> Andreas.

So do you have _any_ positive evidence that _anybody_ is using these
aliases these days?  They are not mentioned in the documentation, and
retaining them for the mere purpose to maybe fool people into doing
something imprudent does not seem really that useful.

As I said already: for historical reasons I have to deal with those
aliases anyway, so I don't depend on this being changed.  But can you
really think of a single actual case where they would be or have been
of actual advantage to anybody?

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum