[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Flycheck reports are never satisfying!?
From: |
Sebastian Wiesner |
Subject: |
Re: Flycheck reports are never satisfying!? |
Date: |
Fri, 29 Aug 2014 11:01:53 +0200 |
Am 28.08.2014 um 17:48 schrieb Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>:
>> 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.
>
>> At least, that’s what I am using in my init.el to avoid warnings about
>> free variables.
>
> I'm surprised it works for you.
I'm sorry, it doesn't, of course. I mistakenly assumed that
with-eval-after-load did that, but actually I'm using my own macro on top of
with-eval-after-load that requires the given feature during byte compilation.
I forgot about that.
Please excuse the confusion.
>
> 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).
Couldn't with-eval-after-load just require the feature if
byte-compile-current-file is non-nil?
At least, that's what I am doing in my own macro, and it works reasonably well.
Message not available
Re: Flycheck reports are never satisfying!?, Sebastian Wiesner, 2014/08/28