Re: Runtime package dependencies and compilation order

[Emanuel Berg]

Boris <d12frosted@gmail.com> writes:

> Recently I've faced following problem. I have
> a package A that might depend on package B or
> (disjunction) package C. But dependency list
> is not known upwards, because the list itself
> depends on user settings. So I don't specify
> B and C in package requires section of
> package A.

"package B or (disjunction) package C" - does
this mean you can't `require' both?
Why not? Collisions?

If so, the idea of the "require list as an
option" strikes me as odd.

Did you see it all over the MELPA world? Scary.

Better: require both B and C.

If you don't want to change the code all over
the place in A (which also is possible), there
are many workarounds that shouldn't be too
slow, for example can you create a "function
pool" and a bunch of variables in A to hold
functions. When the user switches from B to
C mode, or the other way around, the function
pool reassigns the functions in effect in A.

-- 
underground experts united .... http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
Emacs Gnus Blogomatic ......... http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573/blogomatic
                   - so far: 42 Blogomatic articles -