Max Nikulin <manikulin@gmail.com> writes:

>> What if you substitute the load call with
>> (load (byte-compile-dest-file tangled-file))?
>
> I do not mind (of course if there is no plan to deprecate the function).
>
> In addition, from my point of view, `byte-recompile-file' with 0 as the 
> FORCE argument is more suitable than simple `byte-compile-file' since 
> the former does not rewrite the compiled file when it is up to date.

What about simply using touch?