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

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

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 #143 received at 20629 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
Cc: 20629 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#20629: 25.0.50;
 Regression: TAGS broken, can't find anything in C++ files.
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 11:12:31 +0300
> Cc: 20629 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>
> Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 03:09:54 +0300
> 
> On 05/28/2015 07:34 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> > But having just qualified tags is bad for accuracy, right?
> 
> Maybe. Depends on things we would add to the Lisp code.

Can you elaborate?  Is there a way to get the same accuracy and
completion without having both qualified and unqualified tags?

> > So do we have a decision here?
> 
> If you want my opinion (please keep in mind: not an etags user), 
> following in Exuberant Ctags's footsteps sounds best. Nobody ever got 
> fired for doing that.

Yes, but I think if we change etags to create duplicate tags, we
should have this feature opt-out, unlike Exuberant, otherwise TAGS
created by default will be deficient with xref.  Do you agree?




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.