Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 504696d: Etags: yet another improvement in Ruby tags

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 02/04/2016 08:28 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> > class C
> >     puts(attr_accessor :foo)
> > end
> >
> > class C
> >     1 + 2; attr_reader :bar
> > end
> >
> > We don't really need to support them, but actively fighting against them
> > seems odd.
>
> We don't fight them.  The above 2 examples work as expected, please
> try them (if you didn't already).

Tried them now. They do work! Thanks.

> > Point is, the example code is syntactically invalid. etags doesn't need
> > to handle that kind of code at all, right?
>
> No, but I wanted to be sure the invalid code doesn't adversely affect
> valid code further in the file.

Fair enough.

> If you can, by all means.  As I don't speak Ruby, I just went with the
> simplest one I could throw together.

Would

    alias_method :qux, :tee, :bogus

trigger the same problem, and use the same fix?

If not, please disregard this email. The code works well, and supports 
all the main use cases.