Subject: bug#20629: 25.0.50; Regression: TAGS broken, can't find anything in C++ files.

From: Dmitry Gutov <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 05:54:39 +0200

On 11/26/2015 06:32 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> It wasn't done because the discussion didn't reach any consent.

FWIW, I left it with understanding that we should learn to generate both 
qualified and unqualified tag names for C++. Whether to do that by 
default or not, I'm not sure.

But Exuberant Ctags defaults to the latter option, and only generates 
unqualified tag names by default. It would be a good idea to follow 
suit, for consistency if nothing else.

And I'd like to revisit your previous comment:

 > Including the pattern (what you call "the implicit tag") in the
 > completion table could serve as context for disambiguating otherwise
 > similar tag names.

Even if that can work in many cases (patterns are displayed in the xref 
buffer, for example), pattern won't necessarily contain the qualified 
name either.

In Java, it never will, as long as the pattern is created from the 
contents of the line with the method's definition (because there's no 
class name on that line).

In C++, it won't if the method is defined inside the class definition 
(Java-style), which seems to be recommended for short methods.