Re: Flycheck reports are never satisfying!?

[Sebastien Vauban <sva-news-D0wtAvR13HarG/iDocfnWg@public.gmane.org>]

Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> Isn’t that what we have „with-eval-after-load“ for?
>
> with-eval-after-load is there to help make startup more lazy.  But it's
> not particularly designed to help silence "spurious" byte-compiler warnings.
>
> This said, maybe the byte-compiler should treat it specially
> (i.e. treat it sort of like a `require' and forcefully load the file
> before processing the body of the with-eval-after-load).

That would make a lot of sense, IMHO.

And for personal constructions such as:

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(when (try-require 'blah)
  ...)
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Would there be a solution?

Would replacing `try-require' by a `require' with all the necessary
parameters (in order not to stop if the package is missing) be OK?

--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
(when (require 'blah nil t)
  ...)
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---

Would this last construct work?  If yes, I'm willing to use it instead
of my `try-require'...

Best regards,
  Seb

-- 
Sebastien Vauban