bug#22241: 25.0.50; etags Ruby parser problems

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Cc: 22241@debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 00:43:21 +0300
> 
> On 01/23/2016 11:48 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> >> ^[ \t]([A-Z][a-z0-9_])[ \t]*=[ \t]*
> 
>                          ^ I missed a * there.
> 
> >> ? Then record the first group, and simply don't look at what's being
> >> assigned.
> >
> > That's possible, but is it good enough?  Does the above regexp
> > necessarily mean it's a constant?
> 
> I think so. The important point is that its name begins with a capital 
> letter.
> 
> And we should probably recognize assignments like these:
> 
> ModuleExample::CONSTANT = 5
> 
> The qualified name "ModuleExample::CONSTANT" if at the top level, 
> unqualified name is "CONSTANT". When inside classes, modules or methods, 
> only record the unqualified name; maybe disregard these assignments when 
> inside methods altogether.

OK, thanks.  I will see what I can do with this.