Re: small elaboration in tips.texi

[Kevin Rodgers <ihs_4664@yahoo.com>]

Ken Manheimer wrote:
> i hadn't connected the fact that requiring a package for macros can be
> limited to the byte-compilation phase, since the macro expansions are
> compiled in to the resulting byte-code.  i've elaborated the entry
> about limiting dependencies on 'cl in tips.texi to convey that fact.
> i'm including the patch inline below my signature.
...
 > --- tips.texi    10 Jul 2006 10:58:03 -0400    1.85
 > +++ tips.texi    10 Jul 2006 11:40:42 -0400
 > @@ -119,7 +119,9 @@
 > that could cause name clashes for users who don't use that package.
 >
 > However, there is no problem with using the @code{cl} package at compile
 > -time, with @code{(eval-when-compile (require 'cl))}.
 > +time, with @code{(eval-when-compile (require 'cl))}.  That's sufficient
 > +particularly for @code{cl} macros - they are compiled in to the 
resulting
 > +byte-code, so @code{cl} becomes unnecessary at run time.
 >
 > @item
 > When defining a major mode, please follow the major mode

I would phrase it a little differently:

That is sufficient for macros because the compiler expands them
before compiling the resulting Lisp forms into byte-code.

-- 
Kevin