Xref: utzoo comp.emacs:7090 gnu.emacs:1828
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!uhccux!julian
From: julian@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu (Julian Cowley)
Newsgroups: comp.emacs,gnu.emacs
Subject: Byte-compiling yer .emacs (was Re: How to enable flow control)
Message-ID: <5276@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu>
Date: 30 Oct 89 22:11:21 GMT
References: <PCG.89Oct28135938@rupert.cs.aber.ac.uk>
Organization: University of Hawaii at Manoa
Lines: 23

In article <PCG.89Oct28135938@rupert.cs.aber.ac.uk> pcg@rupert.cs.aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) writes:
>Unfortunately I posted a part of my *bytecompiled* $HOME/.emacs file; this
>means that it contained unquoted control chars, that I patched up badly.

Sorry, this is really unrelated to the previous article, but it
just sparked my curiosity on a question that I've never seen asked
before.  In the manual it says that if you have a large amount
of code in a .emacs file, you should move it to another file,
byte-compile it, and load it from .emacs.  Wouldn't byte-compiling
the .emacs be faster?  Unfortunately, the startup.el code
specifically makes sure that it won't load a .emacs.elc file -- is
there some reason why (perhaps philosophical)?

I've actually seen people write ridiculous C-shell aliases to get
around this:

  alias emacs 'emacs -q -l ~/.emacs'

Just wonderin'.

Julian Cowley -- University of Hawaii at Manoa
julian@uhccux.uhcc.hawaii.edu
julian@uhccux.bitnet