dired.el and dired-aux.el

dired.el and dired-aux.el

[Luc Teirlinck]

dired.el contains:

;; To make this file smaller, the less common commands
;; go in a separate file.  But autoload them here
;; to make the separation invisible.

Then follow many autoloads.

Most of these autoloads seem to have an `;;;###autoload' in dired-aux
too, often with a different docstring.  Do these double autoloads have
a purpose?  Many the functions that do not have an `;;;###autoload' in
dired-aux have two docstrings: an obsolete one for before dired-aux is
loaded and an up-to-date one for after that.  There is no indication in
dired-aux that if one changes the docstring of a function there, one
should also change it in the dired.el autoload.

Are these autoloads an obsolete remnant from the time that there were
no `;;;###autoload' cookies?  Should those dired-autoloaded functions
that do not yet have an `;;;###autoload' in dired-aux be given one and
the entire list of autoloads in dired.el be gotten rid of?

Sincerely,

Luc.

Re: dired.el and dired-aux.el

[Richard Stallman]

    Most of these autoloads seem to have an `;;;###autoload' in dired-aux
    too, often with a different docstring.  Do these double autoloads have
    a purpose?

    Are these autoloads an obsolete remnant from the time that there were
    no `;;;###autoload' cookies?

Yes.  However, there may have been another motive to keep them in
dired.el: so that the autoloads would only take up space if dired.el
is loaded.

But that saving of space is unimportant today.

      Should those dired-autoloaded functions
    that do not yet have an `;;;###autoload' in dired-aux be given one and
    the entire list of autoloads in dired.el be gotten rid of?

That sounds like a good idea.