Re: [PATCH] Extra information in autoload error

[Eli Zaretskii]

> 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.