|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | bug#20629: 25.0.50; Regression: TAGS broken, can't find anything in C++ files. |
Date: | Tue, 26 May 2015 13:16:15 +0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.0 |
On 05/26/2015 05:35 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:> Does any other version of ctags produce> better results with the same structure of TAGS?
No, 'ctags -e' gives pretty much the same output that 'etags' does now. So it's definitely acceptable.
Given the structure of TAGS and the way xref picks up the symbol at point, what else can we do? Can you suggest how this could work better even in principle?
I'm not sure.One direction would be to add `:' to NONAM, so that a method name would implicitly match a qualified tag as well. Not sure if it will be a problem in some languages (but in, say, Elisp `:' can be a part of an identifier).
Another - to make etags-tags-completion-table include both the pattern and the explicit tagname in the returned obarray.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |