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 #212 received at 20629 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
On 05/30/2015 05:31 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Feel free to describe a full recipe for comparing. I needed to guess
> what you wanted me to test; I'd be happy to just follow instructions
> and report back what I saw.
I'd rather not bother (let's see if we can conclude this thread of
discussion without that). The patch in question is at
http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=20629#59, and I'm
officially withdrawing it.
>> - Like you mentioned, it's not always that qualified name occurs in the
>> pattern. Sometimes it's creates using curly braces and such, and thus
>> can only occur in an explicit tag name (which the discussed patch won't
>> account for). Thus, some qualified names would be present in
>> completions, and some won't. This is bad.
>
> Do you have an actual example? AFAIU, this shouldn't happen: etags
> only decides that an explicit tag name is unneeded when it can be
> deduced from the pattern. So if the explicit tag is not in TAGS, it
> means etags.el can find it in the pattern. (Qualified tag names that
> are constructed by etags are never in the pattern, so they will always
> get explicit tag names.)
I believe that the current choice is between "etags produces unqualified
tags" and "etags produces both qualified and unqualified tags for lines
where the distinction appies" (2 entries per line).
In the latter case the patch above is extraneous. So above I'm
describing the situation where etags produces unqualified tags (which it
currently does, by default).
> Yes, but I'd like to make a decision before making the change for
> placing 2 entries, so that the number of backward-incompatible changes
> could be minimized.
I think that would be a mistake. Rather, we should make the choice based
on correctness.
> Because if tag-exact-match-p finds a match, tag-implicit-name-match-p
> will not be invoked, AFAIU.
It would, but that's not the point. But yes, the above would make sense.
Anyway...
> And AFAIU we don't, because the match methods are invoked in order,
> until one of them yields a match.
Of course the difference in tag-implicit-name-match-p behavior will only
matter when tag-exact-match-p returns nil for the entry in question.
Which is the case in the example I've given in the previous email.
> Which is why there's an explicit tag there. But I'm afraid I don't
> see what you meant to demonstrate by this example. Which code will
> look for 'edit-abbrevs-map, and under what circumstances?
find-tag, for instance. After being asked by the user. Like I said, it's
a contrived example (users don't usually bother with names as tricky as
this one), but I can try to cook up a more realistic one, if you insist.
An Elisp identifier can actually include a quote if it's escaped, but
that's not the case with edit-abbrevs-map.
>> It's harder to present a realistic case of a user looking for one thing
>> and getting another, but the point is, is the Etags parser decided that
>> the implicit tag doesn't match the explicit tag, we should ignore the
>> former (because we don't really know the way they mismatch).
>
> I think we already do.
Currently, we don't put the implicit tag into the completion table if
the explicit tag is present.
But we do match implicit tags during navigation, even when an explicit
tag is there.
The aforementioned patch would include the implicit tag in the
completion table anyway. I'm now saying we don't want that, and we also
don't want navigation to match implicit tags in the entries that contain
an explicit tag as well.
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.