Re: [PATCH] Extra information in autoload error

[Alex]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

>> From: Alex <address@hidden>
>> Cc: address@hidden, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>
>> Date: Sat, 22 Oct 2016 14:23:34 -0600
>> 
>> (error "Autoloading failed to define function nlinum-mode2 in file
>> /home/alex/.emacs.d/elpa/nlinum-1.6/nlinum.elc")
>> 
>> I also replaced the (require 'linum) with (load "linum") and got the
>> same result.
>> 
>> So it seems to work. It seems that if there's a `require' or `load',
>> then those files get added to `load-history' before the initial file.
>> 
>> >> Ping. Does anyone have an opinion on which of the two diffs is better?
>> >
>> > I'd go with the second,
>> >
>> >
>> >         Stefan
>> 
>> Is it just because it's a "safer" option, or do you (and Eli) figure the
>> second error message would just be better?
>
> The second variant is IMO more accurate: it doesn't claim that the
> missing autoload is in the named file.  In the case above it would say
>
>   Autoloading file /home/alex/.emacs.d/elpa/nlinum-1.6/nlinum.elc
>     failed to define function nlinum-mode2
>
> which is more honest, since we don't know whether the
> problematic/missing autoload is in the named file or in some file(s)
> loaded/required by it, or some macro defined elsewhere altogether.

Sorry, I accidentally posted the older error message instead of the new
one. I was wondering if you preferred the version that used

 SDATA (Fcar (Fcar (Vload_history)))

or

 SDATA (Fcar (Fcdr (fundef)))

to get the extra information. The first one gets the file path, while
the second one just gets what was in the autoload object.