From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#22947: 25.0.92; xref-find-definitions fails for Perl & etags Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 03:08:13 +0200 Message-ID: <7471846c-3ea0-f05f-23b5-deec649c89d5@yandex.ru> References: <22239.6546.544495.576771@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <88256367-3f1d-6dda-a509-d89e3c8e6c28@yandex.ru> <22239.36324.478948.721025@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <83y49qlbam.fsf@gnu.org> <272376b7-ad78-a16d-ceeb-d7408fb59fdb@yandex.ru> <83oaaml57e.fsf@gnu.org> <2823a513-de6a-2c99-fc06-825efb1f0be0@yandex.ru> <83io0ul2vb.fsf@gnu.org> <2c9b9fe9-4df0-1ba2-123d-ab4743bf49ca@yandex.ru> <83ziu5jv92.fsf@gnu.org> <83egbhjc1v.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1457744965 11018 80.91.229.3 (12 Mar 2016 01:09:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 01:09:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 22947@debbugs.gnu.org, rogers@modulargenetics.com To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 12 02:09:11 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aeY3K-0006wm-PD for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Mar 2016 02:09:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58456 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aeY3J-0000ga-Q8 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 20:09:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49850) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aeY3G-0000gV-21 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 20:09:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aeY3C-0003Om-RJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 20:09:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:48457) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aeY3C-0003ON-Ns for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 20:09:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aeY3C-0005Pc-Ha for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 20:09:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Dmitry Gutov Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2016 01:09:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 22947 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 22947-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B22947.145774490320745 (code B ref 22947); Sat, 12 Mar 2016 01:09:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 22947) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Mar 2016 01:08:23 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45584 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aeY2Y-0005OX-Nc for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 20:08:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-wm0-f45.google.com ([74.125.82.45]:33312) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84) (envelope-from ) id 1aeY2X-0005OH-G3 for 22947@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 20:08:21 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-wm0-f45.google.com with SMTP id l68so37860580wml.0 for <22947@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 17:08:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xMXL8Y/PnAsb1P6sTUuuorPPzhhauLfHWnQ5w5dF7zU=; b=aguUnR9xM19X4NtqlTsvDbg9mLLzHo6wvSAA1mDPJNAKAzolRkjPuEEVq6sf4/Xk9W wOmtP2A43DciTXLAv2FkFUtvWy5h5zdu+GCPcVbGTS4JW6jCa9BWwVPYqnOFsCPFu81/ lNbz7bgN8HC/dxkeOCjezm/48CKt06t6T1PGh0gBIhZQYYONYT5n6UcQVcmFRO/86sZY t3aunbRnlQydFK/y6N326CShL83u/EHaJeyrdKKZqgIEbhi0pQVbJ0xtKagNM3j+S1L3 qPM4c+EkhdXT8AGplunjoV6lVgptXVtIFSA4LFsZlFYvpHsqax1pvz2tjWirNc4g+/aS kgIw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id :date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=xMXL8Y/PnAsb1P6sTUuuorPPzhhauLfHWnQ5w5dF7zU=; b=Ycj8SFO7tVwrxZc71PsT17yerApZgIRrOGidSYnuSJfzYniWvHPYbGNACgel+v8iN5 WzKawnwqcOeg1pGiepPfX6nXD+u+u9CZK0mNco43iEwOGm76hMyZaqsjqZvqm4gpf3bS vIGVEVTIp8gwlSnDaSredo7v44cipYNt3L4sK+OFi5OXY61ZJJpjlJXM/kRfCJ+412Cp a73EJplzNp3AUuzyGO82PXXOpEMOw/DoYWJ46hFk9lnUy7hy3xzpfj6wkapJ+40v0LUa qXbyHeGBKDmSSM3qnJQ+H8KfbFPf+V1LF05l+1QlsfkgRJBhcmNjmFIrSAP1vYXCKsWM csyA== X-Gm-Message-State: AD7BkJKRj2fseaR9iJ/NsCa9/23oH/G51nQA4TmN+8gRtjoRE/HbQ4mi1oEIOOzMUxL4Ew== X-Received: by 10.28.214.11 with SMTP id n11mr5359791wmg.31.1457744895902; Fri, 11 Mar 2016 17:08:15 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.2] ([185.105.175.24]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id z6sm4661223wme.9.2016.03.11.17.08.14 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 11 Mar 2016 17:08:15 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 In-Reply-To: <83egbhjc1v.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:114803 Archived-At: On 03/11/2016 04:59 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I said "etags", not "emacs". I don't think this implies any considerable amount of work in etags either. I could be wrong, of course. >> And allowing the output of qualified+unqualified, in etags, doesn't seem >> like a huge job to me. > > For languages where qualified tags are already created, maybe. And it is those languages where I think the users would be served better by a different behavior. > (C-like languages might be not so easy, due to the state machines they > use.) But are we sure all languages do? I'm sorry, all languages do what? Use state machines, and thus are "not so easy"? >> We can perfectly well choose to support this feature only for a few >> languages. It's better than nothing. > > I'm not sure "better than nothing" is good enough. I'm not buying the argument that doing the right thing is somehow undesirable because we can't afford to do the perfect thing right now. Especially since the transition path from "good" to "perfect" is natural in this case (just add support for more languages later). This way, you won't have to change the semantics of -Q in future releases, or invent another flag that behaves similarly to -Q, "but better", and deal with having to document that -Q is not actually recommended for use. > Anyway, I don't really understand what we are arguing about. I'm arguing that -Q should output both qualified and unqualified tags, so that the result is actually useful. You seem to be arguing towards -Q preserving the previous behavior of the parser, _in certain languages_, no matter the usefulness of the resulting tag files. Apparently, to support some consumers of tag files that do it in a fashion we can't predict, and might somehow be inconvenienced if the "qualified-only" output is not one of the options. Is that correct? >> Here's the relevant excerpt from ctags's manpage: > > Thanks, but why do you think I don't have it installed? You might, or you might not. It was easier to quote directly. Does that excerpt not make sense to you? >> Ultimately, it's your choice, of course. > > Volunteers are free to beat me to it, if they have an itch to scratch. If you've made a deliberate choice, it doesn't seem like a patch from a volunteer that would make a different choice is likely to be accepted.