From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: How do I use tags to go to begv_byte instead of BEGV_BYTE? Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 13:31:40 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1274722324 17733 80.91.229.12 (24 May 2010 17:32:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 May 2010 17:32:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Andreas Schwab , Emacs-Devel devel To: Lennart Borgman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 24 19:32:03 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OGbVP-0002yd-JW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 May 2010 19:31:59 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39182 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OGbVP-0006Kj-27 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 May 2010 13:31:59 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=37498 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OGbVC-0006Ib-N9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 May 2010 13:31:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OGbV7-0002Z9-7Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 May 2010 13:31:46 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:61877 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OGbV7-0002Z5-4r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 May 2010 13:31:41 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AvsEAHZU+ktFpZMM/2dsb2JhbACeCnLAVoJuCIIdBIw/ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,292,1272859200"; d="scan'208";a="64935345" Original-Received: from 69-165-147-12.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.165.147.12]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP; 24 May 2010 13:31:40 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 0AD898266; Mon, 24 May 2010 13:31:40 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Lennart Borgman's message of "Mon, 24 May 2010 18:06:22 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:125194 Archived-At: > However it is a quite surprising organizing of case fold search > handling. It looks like it does not care about major mode or buffer > file extension, both of them which could be used to make a better > guess for case fold search. Yes, it's not perfect. To a large extent it is explained by the fact that it's been that way for ages and back then Emacs did not try to be nearly as clever. Nowadays, I think etags.el would deserve to be improved so as to taken the major mode into account, and also so as to give precedence to case-exact matches, and also to automatically try the second-choice if the first makes you jump to where you started. IOW patches welcome, Stefan