Subject: Re: bug#24901: Caught mistake in elec-pair.el patch

From: Noam Postavsky <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2017 11:49:12 -0400

On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 11:36 AM, João Távora <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> writes:
>
>>> Seems to be there for a reason, unfortunately. It's forward
>>> referenced in electric.el if I'm not mistaken.
>>
>> I don't understand this: electric.el is preloaded, so why would it
>> need the autoload?

I think you have the direction backwards: electric.el uses the
autoloaded variable *from* elec-pair.el.

> I don't know, I admit I'm very confused by the autoload logic, so you
> lost me at preloaded.  Also have been away from Elisp for almost a year.
>
> If I remove the autoload I get compilation errors in electric.elc or
> align.elc (from make bootstrap). I might be doing something wrong. How
> can I test the autoload dependecies without a full make bootstrap?

As far as I know, the only way to be sure of testing all dependencies
is deleting all elc files, i.e., a full bootstrap minus the C
compilation (using ccache can help automate the "minus the C
compilation" part).

> And then there's the problem Noam mentioned in elisp-mode.el.

The elisp-mode.el problem is what causes the align.elc failure: the
byte compiler uses elisp-mode.