Re: Install-time byte-compiling: Why bother?

[Chris Waters <xtifr@dsp.net>]

<rjk@greenend.org.uk> writes:

> I suggest, therefore, that the install-time byte-compilation of elisp
> files be either eliminated completely, or turned into an option, with
> the default set to "off".

I *strongly* oppose eliminating it, and I'm not real big on the idea
of making the default be "off".  Installing new packages takes a
while, I don't mind a few extra moments there.  I *do* mind run-time
delays, even if they're small, and only once per session (and they're
not if you unload features to save RAM).  If there's a bug in the
install, it should be reported and fixed, but I have yet to see one.

That said, I'm perfectly happy to see it be optional, as long as it
doesn't result in more install-time questions.  But the *default*
should be whatever is best for the novice running stable.  Which is
"on", since a novice may not be able to figure out how to byte-compile
the package himself.  And stable *better* not have problems in the
install, so problems in the install aren't sufficient justification
for a default of "off".

If you really want something to happen, though, post a proposal to
-policy.  I *will* support the idea of making byte-compilation
optional, even if I don't support eliminating it or defaulting to
"off".
-- 
Chris Waters   xtifr@dsp.net | I have a truly elegant proof of the
      or    xtifr@debian.org | above, but it is too long to fit into
http://www.dsp.net/xtifr     | this .signature file.