Re: dired.el and dired-aux.el

[Richard Stallman]

    Most of these autoloads seem to have an `;;;###autoload' in dired-aux
    too, often with a different docstring.  Do these double autoloads have
    a purpose?

    Are these autoloads an obsolete remnant from the time that there were
    no `;;;###autoload' cookies?

Yes.  However, there may have been another motive to keep them in
dired.el: so that the autoloads would only take up space if dired.el
is loaded.

But that saving of space is unimportant today.

      Should those dired-autoloaded functions
    that do not yet have an `;;;###autoload' in dired-aux be given one and
    the entire list of autoloads in dired.el be gotten rid of?

That sounds like a good idea.