GNU bug report logs -
#20629
25.0.50; Regression: TAGS broken, can't find anything in C++ files.
Previous Next
Reported by: "Jan D." <jan.h.d <at> swipnet.se>
Date: Fri, 22 May 2015 05:59:02 UTC
Severity: normal
Found in version 25.0.50
Done: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
Message #116 received at 20629 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
> Cc: 20629 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
> Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 13:22:01 +0300
>
> On 05/28/2015 05:50 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> > I _was_ talking about explicit tag names.
>
> AFAICS, 'etags -Q' doesn't generate explicit tag names for C++ (for
> cases we're currently discussing).
Yes, it does. Try running it on test/etags/cp-src/c.C, for example.
> Only patterns, to be matched implicitly.
Whether "etags -Q" generates explicit tag names or not is orthogonal
to whether it qualifies class members. The decision depends on the
text surrounding the pattern.
> > Exuberant ctags does have such an option: --extra=+q.
>
> This brings us to the third option. Here's what the 'ctags -e
> --extra=+q' output looks like:
>
> x.cc,210
> class XXXX1,0
> class YYYY8,54
> XX::foo()foo16,98
> XX::foo()XX::foo16,98
> XX::bar()bar22,132
> XX::bar()XX::bar22,132
> YY::bar()bar28,163
> YY::bar()YY::bar28,163
> main(int argc, char *argv[])main34,193
If you mean that producing two entries instead of one under -Q will
produce better results both with xref-find-definitions and with
completion, making the above happen in etags is an easy change, I
think.
This bug report was last modified 9 years and 69 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.