Re: A combination of defmacro, functionp, and quoted lambdas yields different results on consecutive evaluations

[Michael Heerdegen]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

> Another option, is to compile that file and then you can do
>
>     (eval-when-compile (require 'flycheck))
>     (with-eval-after-load 'flycheck
>       (flycheck-define-checker
>         …))
>
> it also works if you don't byte-compile, except that the
> with-eval-after-load becomes ineffective.

So that's not really an option.

I fear that this problem, although there are acceptable workarounds,
could be a regularly recurring issue.  It's not an unnatural expectation
that code in `eval-when-compile' is allowed to use all of the stuff
defined in the FILE.  People use this in their init files, not all will
know about the underlying mechanisms, so this is not really optimal.

Would it make sense to introduce an optional argument for
`eval-after-load' that, when non-nil, arranges that the FORM is
untouched until the FILE is loaded, and then compiled and loaded?  

A disadvantage would be that compiling the init file would not warn any
more about problems in the specified FORM.


Michael.