Re: master 0161c9d 1/2: Load all generic-x.el modes unconditionally

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>
> Cc: stefan@marxist.se,  larsi@gnus.org,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2021 10:23:39 -0500
> 
> >> Nothing terrible.  The question for me was rather "what's the benefit?".
> >> But among the disadvantages, the most obvious one is that you can't rely on
> >> (require 'generic-x) to define your function.
> > Yes, but the docs of the package explicitly documents this, so this is
> > intended behavior.  Like I said, the package is a bit unusual; but
> > being unusual doesn't mean it's bad.  It gets the job done.
> 
> I think unusual is bad unless there's some clear benefit.

This could be a valid argument 20+ years ago, when the package was
added to Emacs.  But that ship has sailed.

> Having control over which modes are auto-activated via `auto-mode-alist`
> is good, so it's a part we can keep.
> 
> Having control over which functions are defined doesn't seem to offer
> any benefit, so I'd rather get rid of this unusual aspect.

Didn't I say that I'm okay with the former?  It's fun to argue, I
know, but since we agree, do we have to continue?

I only mentioned reverting the whole changeset because I sensed Stefan
Kangas was leaning towards it.