TAGS

TAGS

[Jack Wang]

Hi all:



How to generate TAGS file in a complex directory structure (with many subdirectories)? 

I use  find . -name "*.[cch]" -print | etags - to generate TAGS file for all *.cc and *.h files. Are there any other methods?

By the way, when I use M-x tags-search to search a word, e.g., pointer_a, how to make it case-sensitive and match-word-only, so that

POINTER_A and pointer_a_1 will be skipped?



Thanks a lot.



Jack



_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!

Re: TAGS

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "Jack Wang" <jw2000@excite.com>
> Date: Mon,  5 Jan 2004 00:30:06 -0500 (EST)
> 
> How to generate TAGS file in a complex directory structure (with many subdirectories)? 

   find . -name 'whatever' | etags -

> I use  find . -name "*.[cch]" -print | etags - to generate TAGS file for all *.cc and *.h files.

This is fine, but for one problem: "*.[cch]" will _not_ find *.cc
files, since the "[]" group stands for a single character.  So better
use something like

    find . -name "*.[ch]" -o -name "*.cc" | etags -

> Are there any other methods?

What's wrong with this one?

> By the way, when I use M-x tags-search to search a word, e.g., pointer_a, how to make it case-sensitive and match-word-only, so that
> 
> POINTER_A and pointer_a_1 will be skipped?

Did you try to set tags-case-fold-search?

Re: TAGS

[Friedrich Dominicus]

"Jack Wang" <jw2000@excite.com> writes:

> Hi all:
>
>
>
> How to generate TAGS file in a complex directory structure (with
> many subdirectories)?  
depends on the Shell and number of files you're using in zsh e.g you
can just get away with
etags **/*.{c,cc,h} but if there are too many files the command line
will get overflowed.

The other thing which works 

find . -name "*.{c,cc,h}" -exec etags -a -o SOME-TAGS-FILE {} \;

which will call etags on any file and append that stuff to
SOME_TAGS-FILE, well minor errors I may have introduced ;-)

Regards
Friedrich

TAGS

[simon cossar]

Hello list - I hope this as the appropriate place for my question. I am
fairly new to computers - I am just discovering emacs lisp and creating
simple functions. I am trying to view the source code of built in
functions - I understand how to use etags to set up a  tags file for a
directory but I can't find the directory that contains the built in
functions. I am finding all sorts of .elc files. Is it possible that
everything has been byte-compiled? I am on Ubuntu 10.04 (64 bit) with
emacs 23.1.1. If anyone could point me in the right direction it would
be greatly appreciated.  
Simon

Re: TAGS

[rusi]

On Jan 23, 1:12 pm, simon cossar <scos...@telus.net> wrote:
> Hello list - I hope this as the appropriate place for my question. I am
> fairly new to computers - I am just discovering emacs lisp and creating
> simple functions. I am trying to view the source code of built in
> functions - I understand how to use etags to set up a  tags file for a
> directory but I can't find the directory that contains the built in
> functions. I am finding all sorts of .elc files. Is it possible that
> everything has been byte-compiled? I am on Ubuntu 10.04 (64 bit) with
> emacs 23.1.1. If anyone could point me in the right direction it would
> be greatly appreciated.  
> Simon

Strict answer: Built in functions are in source code. If you installed
emacs from apt (apt-get/synaptic etc) you probably dont and cant get
those.  If you want it compile emacs by hand which is not very hard on
linux.

A more helpful answer would be that if

> I am fairly new to computers - I am just discovering
> emacs lisp and creating simple functions.

then you would be better off doing:

while (fairly new to computers and emacs) do
  use emacs
  read elisp

Re: TAGS

[harven]

simon cossar <scossar@telus.net> writes:

> Hello list - I hope this as the appropriate place for my question. I am
> fairly new to computers - I am just discovering emacs lisp and creating
> simple functions. I am trying to view the source code of built in
> functions - I understand how to use etags to set up a  tags file for a
> directory but I can't find the directory that contains the built in
> functions. I am finding all sorts of .elc files. Is it possible that
> everything has been byte-compiled? I am on Ubuntu 10.04 (64 bit) with
> emacs 23.1.1. If anyone could point me in the right direction it would
> be greatly appreciated.  
> Simon

If you want to browse emacs lisp sources, you don't need to create
tags. You can get to the definition of a command by typing
C-h f RET  then enter the name of the command.
You then get a summary of the command in a window.
Now clicking on the underlined filename on the upper right of the window
will bring you to the source.

Re: TAGS

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 23.01.2011 um 09:12 schrieb simon cossar:

> I am finding all sorts of .elc files. Is it possible that everything  
> has been byte-compiled?

To save space an installation of GNU Emacs can be done by only  
installing the ELC files. If you want to see the EL files, i.e., it's  
not enough for you what C-h f <function name> RET returns, then get  
the GNU Emacs source code. Which is now at #23.2.

--
Greetings
                                  <]
   Pete       o        __o         |__    o           recumbo
     ___o    /I       -\<,         |o \  -\),-%       ergo sum!
___/\ /\___./ \___...O/ O____.....`-O-'-()--o_________________

Re: TAGS

[Alain Ketterlin]

Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyballa@Web.DE> writes:

> Am 23.01.2011 um 09:12 schrieb simon cossar:
>
>> I am finding all sorts of .elc files. Is it possible that everything
>> has been byte-compiled?
>
> To save space an installation of GNU Emacs can be done by only
> installing the ELC files. If you want to see the EL files, i.e., it's
> not enough for you what C-h f <function name> RET returns, then get
> the GNU Emacs source code. Which is now at #23.2.

The OP uses ubuntu, which provides lisp source code in specific packages
(with names ending in -el).

-- Alain.

Re: TAGS

[Perry Smith]

On Jan 23, 2011, at 5:17 AM, Peter Dyballa wrote:

> 
> Am 23.01.2011 um 09:12 schrieb simon cossar:
> 
>> I am finding all sorts of .elc files. Is it possible that everything has been byte-compiled?
> 
> To save space an installation of GNU Emacs can be done by only installing the ELC files. If you want to see the EL files, i.e., it's not enough for you what C-h f <function name> RET returns, then get the GNU Emacs source code. Which is now at #23.2.

Also, it might work to post this same question to an ubuntu list asking for what to install to get the source.

In case you didn't get the gist of the previous replies, there are two kinds of source: elisp and c.  With a nice full install (like my Mac has), I can do C-h <function> to get the built in help.  And then I'll have a link at the top that will take me to the source no matter whether it is in lisp or C.  Very very nice to have.

Good luck.

Perry

Re: TAGS

[Peter Dyballa]

Am 23.01.2011 um 16:24 schrieb Perry Smith:

> Also, it might work to post this same question to an ubuntu list  
> asking for what to install to get the source.


Some Linux distributions offer to install the *source* packages as well.

--
Greetings

   Pete

A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no  
longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take  
away.
				– Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

Re: TAGS

[rusi]

On Jan 23, 9:28 pm, Peter Dyballa <Peter_Dyba...@Web.DE> wrote:
> Am 23.01.2011 um 16:24 schrieb Perry Smith:
>
> > Also, it might work to post this same question to an ubuntu list  
> > asking for what to install to get the source.
>
> Some Linux distributions offer to install the *source* packages as well.
>
> --
> Greetings
>
>    Pete
>
> A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no  
> longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take  
> away.
>                                 – Antoine de Saint-Exupéry

Yes its easy to get C sources in ubuntu/debian etc but is that source
package linked with the emacs binary?  ie does help on a builtin C
function take you straight there? I would be surprised if yes.
elisp sources are much easier and you should get them in package
emacs23-el elisp-manual (at least thats what it is on debian)

Re: TAGS

[Memnon Anon]

rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> writes:

> Strict answer: Built in functions are in source code. If you installed
> emacs from apt (apt-get/synaptic etc) you probably dont and cant get
> those.  If you want it compile emacs by hand which is not very hard on
> linux.

Package: emacs23-el
Priority: optional
Section: editors
Installed-Size: 16076
Maintainer: Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org>
Architecture: all
Source: emacs23
Version: 23.2+1-7
Depends: emacs23-common (= 23.2+1-7)
Filename: pool/main/e/emacs23/emacs23-el_23.2+1-7_all.deb
Size: 13706372
MD5sum: 7ef805f9c2bbc10c9aef49ea53984a77
SHA1: 2da5302944705aa1a3c4e50145a552a7a89fa8fd
SHA256: be99c45355e102f7f16409d7b9f239d6df79fbdf8a9d8e8bcc08d16991674f82
Description: GNU Emacs LISP (.el) files
 GNU Emacs is the extensible self-documenting text editor.
 This package contains the elisp sources for the convenience of users,
 saving space in the main package for small systems.
Homepage: http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
Tag: devel::lang:lisp, implemented-in::lisp, role::source, suite::emacs

Re: TAGS

[rusi]

On Jan 23, 10:15 pm, Memnon Anon <gegendosenflei...@googlemail.com>
wrote:
> rusi <rustompm...@gmail.com> writes:
> > Strict answer: Built in functions are in source code. If you installed
> > emacs from apt (apt-get/synaptic etc) you probably dont and cant get
> > those.  If you want it compile emacs by hand which is not very hard on
> > linux.
>
> Package: emacs23-el
> Priority: optional
> Section: editors
> Installed-Size: 16076
> Maintainer: Rob Browning <r...@defaultvalue.org>
> Architecture: all
> Source: emacs23
> Version: 23.2+1-7
> Depends: emacs23-common (= 23.2+1-7)
> Filename: pool/main/e/emacs23/emacs23-el_23.2+1-7_all.deb
> Size: 13706372
> MD5sum: 7ef805f9c2bbc10c9aef49ea53984a77
> SHA1: 2da5302944705aa1a3c4e50145a552a7a89fa8fd
> SHA256: be99c45355e102f7f16409d7b9f239d6df79fbdf8a9d8e8bcc08d16991674f82
> Description: GNU Emacs LISP (.el) files
>  GNU Emacs is the extensible self-documenting text editor.
>  This package contains the elisp sources for the convenience of users,
>  saving space in the main package for small systems.
> Homepage:http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
> Tag: devel::lang:lisp, implemented-in::lisp, role::source, suite::emacs

I guess there is a confusion because the word "builtin" has two
closely related but different meanings.

Narrow meaning: "builtin" means built into the C core -- ie written in
C.
You will see this usage if you ask help on the function car or +

The looser broader meaning is: anything that comes with emacs.

If the OP meant the looser meaning then emacs23-el should (mostly)
suffice
If the narrower then he will probably need to compile emacs for
himself.
In any case etags-tagging is not necessary and if you do it it will be
a big pain to interface it with the emacs describe-fucntion etc help
system

Re: TAGS

[simon cossar]

Thank you for your replies, I was looking everywhere for the elisp
source code - it's good to know it isn't there. I learned a lot about my
file system in the process. It would be great to see the .el files, as
I'm finding emacs lisp combined with the C-h f function surprisingly
easy to read. 
Thanks again,
Simon

On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 09:24 -0600, Perry Smith wrote:
> On Jan 23, 2011, at 5:17 AM, Peter Dyballa wrote:
> 
> > 
> > Am 23.01.2011 um 09:12 schrieb simon cossar:
> > 
> >> I am finding all sorts of .elc files. Is it possible that everything has been byte-compiled?
> > 
> > To save space an installation of GNU Emacs can be done by only installing the ELC files. If you want to see the EL files, i.e., it's not enough for you what C-h f <function name> RET returns, then get the GNU Emacs source code. Which is now at #23.2.
> 
> Also, it might work to post this same question to an ubuntu list asking for what to install to get the source.
> 
> In case you didn't get the gist of the previous replies, there are two kinds of source: elisp and c.  With a nice full install (like my Mac has), I can do C-h <function> to get the built in help.  And then I'll have a link at the top that will take me to the source no matter whether it is in lisp or C.  Very very nice to have.
> 
> Good luck.
> 
> Perry
> 

Re: TAGS

[simon cossar]

Hi all, after a bit of searching...the emacs .el files are available
through the ubuntu/emacs ppa. In case anyone is as ignorant as I am (I
am assuming this is archived) the files are compressed and need to be
extracted BEFORE you can create a functioning tags table.
Simon

On Sun, 2011-01-23 at 17:28 +0100, Peter Dyballa wrote:
> Am 23.01.2011 um 16:24 schrieb Perry Smith:
> 
> > Also, it might work to post this same question to an ubuntu list  
> > asking for what to install to get the source.
> 
> 
> Some Linux distributions offer to install the *source* packages as well.
> 
> --
> Greetings
> 
>    Pete
> 
> A designer knows he has arrived at perfection not when there is no  
> longer anything to add, but when there is no longer anything to take  
> away.
> 				– Antoine de Saint-Exupéry
> 

Re: TAGS

[rusi]

On Jan 24, 5:59 am, simon cossar <scos...@telus.net> wrote:
> Hi all, after a bit of searching...the emacs .el files are available
> through the ubuntu/emacs ppa.

Did you install emacs23-el? http://packages.ubuntu.com/maverick/emacs23-el
And you did you wont need ppa... etags
If you did and you dont get the el files still you probably have a
ubuntu packaging bug

Please let me know  -- What are all the emacs-related packages you
have installed?
ppa.. will give you unnecessary dependency-hell at a later point

[Sorry for my first answer: I thought you wanted the C-builtins --
ignore]

> In case anyone is as ignorant as I am (I
> am assuming this is archived) the files are compressed and need to be
> extracted BEFORE you can create a functioning tags table.
> Simon

If emacs is setup correctly the el files can stay compressed and emacs
will unzip before open-ing then.