Re: Getting tired of "[Failure] The Package Smoketest"
Michael Sperber writes:
> Isn't that a bad thing? If it isn't, why does this
defwhatever need
> to be autoloaded at all?
So that references to the variable don't fail, I assume.
C'mon, Mike, you're being evasive and lazy. If you make me do the
work that you're too lazy to do, don't expect me to be sympathetic.
Now, grep says there aren't any in jde/lisp. Based on the fact that
when setting this variable you also define `jde-gen-hashcode-method'
which uses the tempoized version of that value (*not* the variable),
it is presumably *incorrect* to refer to that variable in code.
I assume the variable itself exists only to allow customization of
`jde-gen-hashcode-method'.
I propose that the sane thing to do is just get rid of autoload
cookies for defcustoms in JDE. I bet you don't ever miss them; only
Paul Kinnucan will (my guess is that he uses customize to make
on-the-fly bugfixes to the templates).
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta