From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Removing unloaded functions from auto-mode-alist. Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:25:50 +0200 Message-ID: <85y8bd9ovl.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <87zmvu6ba2.fsf@xs4all.nl> <85ll7e68ei.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <854qe2ihhi.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87d5spxzml.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <85acntfnlb.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <8564yhcl2a.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1114034426 5113 80.91.229.2 (20 Apr 2005 22:00:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:00:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, Lute.Kamstra.lists@xs4all.nl, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 21 00:00:22 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DONDu-0004wW-V3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 23:59:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DONIV-0004Kv-27 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 18:03:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DOLnr-000249-26 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 16:28:07 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DOLnn-000237-KG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 16:28:05 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DOLnn-0001j1-HK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 16:28:03 -0400 Original-Received: from [151.189.21.48] (helo=mail-in-08.arcor-online.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA:24) (Exim 4.34) id 1DOLoK-0007As-AN; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 16:28:36 -0400 Original-Received: from lola.goethe.zz (i53879BBD.versanet.de [83.135.155.189]) by mail-in-08.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA86775F02; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:26:03 +0200 (CEST) Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id B66291C1E222; Wed, 20 Apr 2005 22:25:50 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Wed, 20 Apr 2005 16:11:33 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:36195 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:36195 Stefan Monnier writes: >> I explained already why nothing else makes sense. AUCTeX makes >> extensive use of mode cookies in local variables, and those are only >> obeyed in the lowercase version. The choice of AUCTeX vs tex-mode is >> a user preference and should not be embedded into files. > > I of course understand why it would override them, but not why it > would set major-mode to `latex-mode' rather than to `LaTeX-mode'. > > In my opinion, LaTeX-mode is the AUCTeX major mode, while latex-mode > can be either, depending on the user's preference. You are confusing the value of the major-mode variable with the invocation. The invocation "LaTeX-mode" installs latex-mode with AUCTeX keybindings, syntax tables, mode hooks and variables. >> I am still thinking about whether to keep the current scheme which >> has tex-mode as the main function and TeX-mode as an alias into it, >> or switch that around. > > I'll very much vote in favor of switching it around. Noted in case that my indecision is not resolved by other considerations. >> The problem with a switch is that "autoload" will not replace >> aliases, and so I can't replace the Emacs default scheme by just >> specifying new autoloads. > > Indeed, as shown in my sample auctex-override.el you just have to > explicitly fmakunbound them before setting up the autoload. No > biggie, tho. Except that it makes it harder to have unload-feature restore the state previous to the loading. In short, it seems to complicate achieving a clean switch between tex-mode.el and AUCTeX, but it seems like a somewhat more natural starting positiong when one indeed wants to employ both modes in a single session. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum