Re: Dependency on tex-buf.el

[Tassilo Horn]

Hi Keita,

> However, I think that we should first discuss what to do with this
> policy spelled out in tex.el:
> ;; The following dependencies are not done with autoload cookies since
> ;; they are only useful when tex.el is loaded, anyway.  tex-buf.el
> ;; should remain unloaded as long as one is only editing files, so
> ;; requiring it here would be wrong.
> (Arash mentioned this, too[1].)
>
> If AUCTeX is to abandon it, the simplest solution to the original
> problem of this message is:
> (C) Add "(require 'tex-buf)" to latex.el and tex-info.el. (We can omit
>     some defvar's and declare-function's in them as well.)

You've missed this option:

  (C') Move all tex-buf stuff into tex.el and get rid of that ugly
       circular dependency and nuke all of those byte-compiler
       sanitizing defvars, declare-functions, and autoloads.

I'd vote for C' unless someone can tell me why this separation is
needed.  It looks like its intention was to save some memory back in the
old days.  Noble idea but still useful?  I don't think so.  tex-buf is
not that huge.  Ok, it requires comint but that's used by so many emacs
packages anyway.  Even the stock Emacs tex-mode.el requires compile
which requires comint...

Bye,
Tassilo