Re: unload-feature questions and thoughts

[Juanma Barranquero]

On 2/4/07, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:

> We had this discussion already.  IIRC, load could be used multiple
> times and in so many contexts, that is was not reasonable to expect it
> to be undoable.
OTOH, `unload-feature' exists for a reason; and packages that do
non-standard things (like redefining standard functions) can define
their own unload functions.

But question 3) was not about unloading, though I mentioned it at the
end; it was about the difference in the resulting 'autoload property
of function symbols depending on whether you use the autoloading vs.
the normal load/require mechanisms.

> Before we coded this hack, there was a discussion on emacs-devel
> because I had been surprised, too.
Couldn't AUCTeX just define AUCTeX-unload-hook and do whatever it is necessary?

> Anyway, this is most emphatically not something that should be changed
> now.
Agreed. I didn't send a patch or even suggested a "fix" :)

> But maybe it would be worth documenting something about it.
I think so.
                   /L/e/k/t/u