From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: IDE Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2015 11:09:56 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <<8f6b4e5c-6872-4f53-845e-b671b7fe0f8e@default>> <<831tckw43x.fsf@gnu.org>> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1445710252 8497 80.91.229.3 (24 Oct 2015 18:10:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Oct 2015 18:10:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: nix@esperi.org.uk, emacs-devel@gnu.org, esperanto@cumego.com, adatgyujto@gmail.com, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 24 20:10:33 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1Zq3Gy-0007gZ-4q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 20:10:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45242 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zq3Gx-0003dC-CH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 14:10:31 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35203) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zq3Gq-0003aA-9z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 14:10:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zq3Gp-00038Q-FZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 14:10:24 -0400 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:23758) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zq3Gl-00036S-NA; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 14:10:19 -0400 Original-Received: from userv0022.oracle.com (userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id t9OI9wsc015673 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Sat, 24 Oct 2015 18:09:58 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by userv0022.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t9OI9vQ6014355 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 24 Oct 2015 18:09:58 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0016.oracle.com (abhmp0016.oracle.com [141.146.116.22]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id t9OI9v64022980; Sat, 24 Oct 2015 18:09:57 GMT In-Reply-To: <<831tckw43x.fsf@gnu.org>> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:192574 Archived-At: > > And I definitely have TAGS files that have multiple entries > > for the same symbol definition. The definitions are from > > different source files, but they are in the same TAGS file > > (in different sections, separated by form-feed chars). > > > > For example: > > ^L > > frame-cmds-OLD.el,1980 > > (defun iconify-everything ()=7Ficonify-everything=01298,11152 > > ... > > ^L > > frame-cmds.el,1890 > > (defun iconify-everything ()=7Ficonify-everything=01141,5218 >=20 > These are two different symbols, because the file name is (implicitly) > part of it. There can be at most one definition per file, but many > references. Now you've changed the kind of "file" being talked about. You are now presumably saying that there can be only one definition for a given term per _source_ file, not per _TAGS_ file. The question being discussed was whether you could have multiple "definitions" of a term in the same TAGS file. And AFAICT you can. And a fortiori, you can have multiple definitions of a given term in a set of multiple TAGS files, which is part of the design for querying tags.