Published 2025-10-10

tag(s): #overblown-minor-annoyances #random-thoughts #emacs

Usually when I start thinking about something like this, it means I will do it sooner or later. It happened with moving the site to a proper server, changing my keyboard keycaps, revisiting all my Emacs keymaps[1], and a long etc if I keep going back in time. In some cases it takes me a few days, in others even months...but I eventually do it.

Let’s take a look at my considerations for and against use-package.

The good

Everyone else is using it. Which is not a minor thing: most packages provide a use-package declaration to install and configure them.

It abstracts away repetitive code, in particular around keymaps and bindings. Also hooks I guess. It also helps with package dependencies and conditional loading, thanks to :after, :if, etc.

And finally, probably the biggest selling point, it makes lazy-loading of packages the default experience.

The not so good

When I moved my configuration to use-package, I expected it to become shorter or more “compact”. But I remember once I was done, I didn’t feel like my init file was much different. If anything, it read a bit more cluttered.[2] I recall I even considered reverting all the changes, but figured I would give it some time.

use-package abstracts away a lot of repetitive code, as with any abstraction, sometimes you have to really think about what happens under the covers to understand why something works/doesn’t work. And some newer keymaps macros and functions don’t work directly in use-package yet. I figure support will be added very soon, and that those kind of “core” changes aren’t common, but still.

Things that matter to me

We have to normalize things being “because I feel this way about it”. These aren’t objective reasons. They might be wrong, and eventually I read something that makes me reconsider. They might only apply to my use cases. Or maybe is just a matter of taste about code and style. In any case, I am open to feedback about them! :)[3]

The network effect of use-package is not very relevant to me lately, as I only have installed about 4 external packages. I’ve read a few times people suggesting their init file is more organized with use-package, but I find that mine is about the same. I used to organize the packages alphabetically...and I still do. I think I would lean into splitting my config into smaller files, maybe, which is orthogonal to use-package.[4]

And finally, the big one. Lazy loading helps with init times, which should matter to me, since my work laptop runs Windows. 🙄 Except that I start Emacs once in a while, and I am more bothered by some features that don’t work right away. Example, I try to find-file using TRAMP syntax, but TRAMP isn’t loaded. I mean, I have to fix my config to load it, but this case in particular, I am not calling any command or binding. So a simple (require 'tramp) in my init would work.

And once I go down that line of thinking, I figure, why not change this or that other block too to be just a couple function calls and keymap-set...and well, here I am, arguing for changing everything. Combined to also feeling that I’d rather wait 2, 3 or 10 seconds more once, than have a little stutter when I invoke something in a package that wasn’t loaded yet. And yes, this mostly applies to my work laptop, but I am not maintaining two sets of configs.[5]

A more stylistic/philosophical point

For a while now I’ve been wary of the sins we developers commit in the name of not repeating code, or to reduce our typing effort. You know what? I will take some repetition and boilerplate, if it means the code is more straightforward to reason about.

Up to what point, you might ask? When is too much repetition worse than an abstraction? And I say...I don’t know, it depends on the case :)

Which is another thing I have been thinking about (and maybe will write about) for a couple months now: let’s embrace “it depends”. Not everything needs a hard rule or to be applied consistently. It’s OK to adjust to the circumstances, or to change your stance based on some parameters. And when is it “adjusting your stance to the circumstances”, and when is it “you are just an inconsistent mess”? Well...it depends. =P

Footnotes

1. I’ve been meaning to write a post about that. Soon™️
2. I don’t see it the same way nowadays, probably because I am more familiar with use-package-style blocks.
3. Unless I move away from use-package this very weekend. Forecast says it will be rainy ;)
4. I didn’t plan on using the word “orthogonal”. It feels like a “I want to sound smart” word, and it bothers me enough that I am writing a footnote about it. But it fit exactly what I was trying to say, so.
5. I already have an additional file that is only loaded for work stuff, that I keep in a separate, private, repo.

---

Share your thoughts (via email)

Back to top

Back to homepage

p