loaddefs.el and MH-E

loaddefs.el and MH-E

[Eli Zaretskii]

If I say "make autoloads" in the lisp directory, loaddefs.el gets
several autoload lines for MH-E symbols.  However, there's also the
mh-loaddefs.el file in the mh-e subdirectory.  Can this cause any
trouble?

Re: loaddefs.el and MH-E

[Bill Wohler]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> If I say "make autoloads" in the lisp directory, loaddefs.el gets
> several autoload lines for MH-E symbols.  However, there's also the
> mh-loaddefs.el file in the mh-e subdirectory.  Can this cause any
> trouble?

Eli,

The loaddefs.el definitions are the entry points into MH-E and these
(few) definitions should be the only ones from MH-E loaded initially.
Once MH-E is loaded, the definitions in mh-loaddefs.el are loaded for
the support functions. The only trouble that it would cause to load the
mh-loaddefs.el prematurely is to make it difficult for the new user to
decide which of the hundreds of functions to choose. You shouldn't have
to worry about mh-loaddefs.el unless you changed the loading procedure
to load */*loaddefs.el when creating the Emacs image. You haven't done
that, have you?

-- 
Bill Wohler <wohler@newt.com>  http://www.newt.com/wohler/  GnuPG ID:610BD9AD
Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and MH-E. Vote Libertarian!
If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.

Re: loaddefs.el and MH-E

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 11:41:26 -0700
> From: Bill Wohler <wohler@newt.com>
> 
> The loaddefs.el definitions are the entry points into MH-E and these
> (few) definitions should be the only ones from MH-E loaded initially.
> Once MH-E is loaded, the definitions in mh-loaddefs.el are loaded for
> the support functions. The only trouble that it would cause to load the
> mh-loaddefs.el prematurely is to make it difficult for the new user to
> decide which of the hundreds of functions to choose.

Sorry, for some reason it seemed to me that I saw the autoloads for
the same symbols in both of the files.  I now see that they are
completely disjoint.

> You shouldn't have
> to worry about mh-loaddefs.el unless you changed the loading procedure
> to load */*loaddefs.el when creating the Emacs image. You haven't done
> that, have you?

No, of course not.

Re: loaddefs.el and MH-E

[Bill Wohler]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> > Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 11:41:26 -0700
> > From: Bill Wohler <wohler@newt.com>
> > 
> > The loaddefs.el definitions are the entry points into MH-E and these
> > (few) definitions should be the only ones from MH-E loaded initially.
> > Once MH-E is loaded, the definitions in mh-loaddefs.el are loaded for
> > the support functions. The only trouble that it would cause to load the
> > mh-loaddefs.el prematurely is to make it difficult for the new user to
> > decide which of the hundreds of functions to choose.
> 
> Sorry, for some reason it seemed to me that I saw the autoloads for
> the same symbols in both of the files.

That would not be intentional, but as long as the entry points weren't
missing from loaddefs.el, I don't think it would do any harm to have
duplicates in mh-loaddefs.el, would it?

-- 
Bill Wohler <wohler@newt.com>  http://www.newt.com/wohler/  GnuPG ID:610BD9AD
Maintainer of comp.mail.mh FAQ and MH-E. Vote Libertarian!
If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.

Re: loaddefs.el and MH-E

[Eli Zaretskii]

> cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Sun, 29 Aug 2004 21:06:20 -0700
> From: Bill Wohler <wohler@newt.com>
> 
> > Sorry, for some reason it seemed to me that I saw the autoloads for
> > the same symbols in both of the files.
> 
> That would not be intentional, but as long as the entry points weren't
> missing from loaddefs.el, I don't think it would do any harm to have
> duplicates in mh-loaddefs.el, would it?

I don't think so, but it would at least cause confusion, so I'm glad
this was a false alarm.