Re: Generalizing find-definition

[Stefan Monnier]

> The only single string that reliably would allow to find the correct
> definition would be "foo.Foo.baz", but I do not think that anyone
> would consider that to be "the identifier at point" here.

I would.

>> Note that such completion tables are clearly not lists of strings, but
>> they're functions (actually, they're objects represented as functions,
>> for lack of an object system).
> What is the advantage of having the backend define a function that
> returns a completion table as opposed to a function that prompts the
> user for a symbol? The saved code seems minimal, and it means the
> backend can not set the prompt, for example.

It means the UI can use it for various kinds of completion (e.g. for
completion-at-point-function).


        Stefan