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

From: Dmitry Gutov <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 13:16:15 +0300

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.