Re: Compilation warnings in mouse.el

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

EZ> Unlike Stefan, I think we should add :group to every defcustom. Having
EZ> them mysteriously missing from some of them is a time bomb: 
>> The way I see it, defcustoms should pretty much never have :group, and
>> the group to which they belong is simply determined by the file in which
>> they occur.
> That would mean that in multifile packages the defcustoms must always be
> put in one single file,

Notice I said "pretty much".  Obviously, there will be exceptions, so
we do want to keep the :group for those situations.

> which must be named according to the customisation group one wants to
> create.  And creating multiple customisaton groups for a single package
> (not uncommon in larger packages) would require multiple files.

The current system (default to the last group defined in the current
file) lets you define several groups along with their defcustoms in
a single file without the use of :group.

> That's to say, such a system would require that the code of a package be
> organised along the lines of the customisation groups it provides.  But
> customisation is a UI feature, and as such does not necessarily present
> the best way to organise the code.

Agreed.  But in practice the most common situation is to have the
defgroup in the same file as the corresponding defcustoms.

Maybe a bit less so in multi-file packages (especially less so in
*small* multi-file packages, I think).


        Stefan