From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Joe Corneli Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: how can I tell emacs to treat a text file as html? Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:44:10 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87wtrbajgq.fsf-monnier+gnu.emacs.help@gnu.org> <87br8nh1p8.fsf@thalassa.informatimago.com> <871x9dzfw0.fsf-monnier+gnu.emacs.help@gnu.org> <86vf6oqy5p.fsf@pallotta.studby.uio.no> <87psww182s.fsf-monnier+gnu.emacs.help@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1113577460 5946 80.91.229.2 (15 Apr 2005 15:04:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 15:04:20 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 15 17:04:15 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DMSMD-0000Jv-DP for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 17:03:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DMSPj-0000l8-7P for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 11:07:23 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DMSHM-0002Sd-3U for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:58:44 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DMSH8-0002P2-SL for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:58:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DMSH7-0002GG-Cn for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:58:29 -0400 Original-Received: from [146.6.139.124] (helo=dell3.ma.utexas.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DMS47-0002iV-E5 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 10:45:03 -0400 Original-Received: from lab45.ma.utexas.edu (mail@lab45.ma.utexas.edu [128.83.133.159]) by dell3.ma.utexas.edu (8.11.0.Beta3/8.10.2) with ESMTP id j3FEiAf03148; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:44:10 -0500 Original-Received: from jcorneli by lab45.ma.utexas.edu with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1DMS3G-0002fS-00; Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:44:10 -0500 Original-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org In-reply-to: <87psww182s.fsf-monnier+gnu.emacs.help@gnu.org> (message from Stefan Monnier on Fri, 15 Apr 2005 09:36:20 -0400) X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:25720 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.help:25720 > | > But, note, what you should really do is byte compile the .emacs, > | > using > | No. That's almost never a good idea. > Is it a bad idea, and why? Maybe you'll never suffer from any bad effect, but since the .emacs file rarely if ever contains any loop (the only place where byte-compilation of .emacs has a fighting chance of having a measurable impact on execution time), it's just not worth the trouble. As the person who brought forth this mildly contentious and somewhat silly notion of "byte compiling .emacs", let me just mention that I (also) always byte compile packages that I write, and that I think _that_ does have a beneficial effect. The compiler will catch things like undefined variables & other such bugs that the interpreter doesn't catch. 'Pon fixing these, the code is improved. The fact that you _shouldn't_ do this in .emacs (now accepted by me, and I'm planning on entering a .emacs rehab) sorta/kinda rests on the principle that there shouldn't be much code in the .emacs anyway (see another recent thread).