From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is (provide 'foo) at the start good or bad? Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:09:43 +0900 Message-ID: <87r5xqw0s8.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <21glws7jx732.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1244779655 3183 80.91.229.12 (12 Jun 2009 04:07:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2009 04:07:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Leo Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 12 06:07:31 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MEy38-0002PU-Sy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 06:07:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58994 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MEy38-0004dn-7i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:07:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MEy33-0004dX-WC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:07:26 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MEy2z-0004ag-CF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:07:25 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60895 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MEy2z-0004aZ-7i for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:07:21 -0400 Original-Received: from mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.223]:34429) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MEy2y-0005qU-MZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 00:07:21 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mtps01.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA1E31537B6; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:07:12 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E9F611A27C1; Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:09:43 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 8.0.12-devo-585 under 21.5 (beta28) "fuki" 83e35df20028+ XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:111444 Archived-At: Leo writes: > > one less char). So what is the benefit of providing it at the very > > start? > > I have run into this problem before. I prefer putting provide at the end > of the file. Putting the provide form at the beginning allows mutually recursive requires to succeed. I also prefer it as a matter of style, sort of serving as a `declare-package'. Regarding work-arounds, I would do the OP's task (customizing a variable) in a mode-hook using `add-to-list', rather than as an eval-after-load.