From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: unload-feature questions and thoughts Date: Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:14:41 +0100 Message-ID: <851wl5d9b2.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <85bqk9db9a.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1170616513 8583 80.91.229.12 (4 Feb 2007 19:15:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 4 Feb 2007 19:15:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs Devel To: "Juanma Barranquero" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Feb 04 20:15:04 2007 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 1HDmpM-0001Gf-0X for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Feb 2007 20:15:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HDmpN-0007AP-4c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 04 Feb 2007 14:15:05 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HDmp9-000798-5Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Feb 2007 14:14:51 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HDmp7-00077S-KX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Feb 2007 14:14:50 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HDmp7-00077O-DB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Feb 2007 14:14:49 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-in-09.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.49]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1HDmp7-0000rq-2P for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 04 Feb 2007 14:14:49 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-in-04-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-04-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.16]) by mail-in-09.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E3978302F2B; Sun, 4 Feb 2007 20:14:46 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from mail-in-09.arcor-online.net (mail-in-09.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.49]) by mail-in-04-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6585FB85C; Sun, 4 Feb 2007 20:14:46 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from lola.goethe.zz (dslb-084-061-048-252.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.61.48.252]) by mail-in-09.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B8EB35A7A8; Sun, 4 Feb 2007 20:14:46 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 451A61C4CE1D; Sun, 4 Feb 2007 20:14:42 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Juanma Barranquero's message of "Sun\, 4 Feb 2007 20\:07\:06 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.93 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 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:65860 Archived-At: "Juanma Barranquero" writes: > On 2/4/07, David Kastrup wrote: > >> We had this discussion already. IIRC, load could be used multiple >> times and in so many contexts, that is was not reasonable to expect it >> to be undoable. > > OTOH, `unload-feature' exists for a reason; and packages that do > non-standard things (like redefining standard functions) can define > their own unload functions. > > But question 3) was not about unloading, though I mentioned it at the > end; it was about the difference in the resulting 'autoload property > of function symbols depending on whether you use the autoloading vs. > the normal load/require mechanisms. > >> Before we coded this hack, there was a discussion on emacs-devel >> because I had been surprised, too. > > Couldn't AUCTeX just define AUCTeX-unload-hook and do whatever it is > necessary? It defines tex-site-unload-hook already. But "whatever is necessary" pretty much means restoring all functions overwritten by AUCTeX, and there is no point in not using the autoload unloader for that. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum