Ihor Radchenko <[email protected]> writes: >> I suppose (A) would be soft-deprecated in documentation and (B) would be >> consulted only for `nil', as in "this language is explicitly disabled"? >> Or, would we replace both with one simple `org-babel-disabled-languages' >> customization that does what it says on the tin, with no loading magic? > > Respecting disabled languages clashes with the idea of autoloads. > On the other hand, if some third-party library does provide autoloads, > it is already not respected anyway... > > So, we should probably deprecate org-babel-load-languages and instead > fully switch to lazy loading. At the end, its main purpose is speeding > up loading Org, which lazy loading achieves anyway. People generally > ever disable languages in org-babel-load-languages when they are loaded > by default but not being used. > > I think I prefer 2 over 1 because putting an autoload cookie on several > defuns risks that some cookies may be forgotten, creating subtle bugs. > > (3) is fine.
Rudolf, I see that you are back to the list recently. Have you had a chance to look into this patch? -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode maintainer, Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>. Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>, or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>
