Re: use-package :after ??

[Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org>]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:

>> For instance, what happens if A should be after B, but you
>> never define B with use-package?
>
> Isn't it clear? If B is never loaded, A will _never_ be
> loaded in that case. It doesn't matter whether B is loaded
> via use-package or by some other means. How is this NOT
> clear from the description?
>
>> Or B is demand loaded later?
>
> Later than what? A will _always_ be loaded as the last step
> in loading B, whenever the latter happens.
>
>> Or make the rule explicit in infodoc that :after does what
>> it does regardless of demand/defer.
>
> So is the difficulty because of :defer and/or :demand?
> If so, please ask questions that involve those. Because so
> far you were asking about :after alone, and there I see
> nothing unclear.

Why should this be done manually at all?

For example, a source file should just say, I need X, Y and
Z since I use stuff from those.

What order they are loaded shouldn't matter since they are
all needed. Also, whatever stuff they themselves need is up to
them to solve - with the same simple method, preferably.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal