From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `thunk-let'? Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 08:33:14 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87infp9z6j.fsf@web.de> <87zi90eehg.fsf@web.de> <87o9ocd6s4.fsf@web.de> <87wp2zcwm2.fsf@web.de> <87mv3vwb2c.fsf_-_@web.de> <87h8tnowl4.fsf@web.de> <83vai3asgt.fsf@gnu.org> <83mv3eb85m.fsf@gnu.org> <87a7zdbsyf.fsf@web.de> <873755hbpr.fsf@web.de> <873754bm10.fsf@web.de> <83r2so9in9.fsf@gnu.org> <83lgiw9gvi.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1511530582 5809 195.159.176.226 (24 Nov 2017 13:36:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 13:36:22 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 24 14:36:11 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eIE9K-0000ll-Qj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 14:36:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49311 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eIE9S-0005mF-5b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 08:36:18 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45972) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eIE6o-0003c3-2J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 08:33:34 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eIE6k-0003R8-AY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 08:33:34 -0500 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=34563 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eIE6k-0003Px-3C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 08:33:30 -0500 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eIE6S-0006bE-Vk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 14:33:12 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 21 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:JyOFUMEKCuDgyNoRuTQV2SEyuSI= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:220429 Archived-At: >> >> A second question is: Do we really want to have the library have no >> >> autoloads? >> > I see no reason not to autoload these. >> Well, it's pretty easy for those few Elisp file which use it to >> (require 'thunk), so I'm not sure it's worth the hassle of autoloading. > What's the "hassle"? With libraries of functions like thunk.el, the hassles have to do with the fact that almost all functions need to be autoloaded, that compilation can generate invalid code if the autoloads were not yet in place (so macros failed to be macro-expanded), the cost of the autoloads themselves, ... These are minor, so if/when thunk.el is used by a large portion of Elisp packages, these issues aren't significant, but given that it's currently used by ... only 2 packages so far AFAICT (el-search and stream), I really don't see any justification for autoloading its functions: the cost is low but the benefit is even lower. Stefan