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#20629: 25.0.50; Regression: TAGS broken, can't find anything in C++ files. Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 05:54:39 +0200 Message-ID: <5657D3FF.4000703@yandex.ru> References: <555EC552.5010600@swipnet.se> <83pp5r1hdx.fsf@gnu.org> <83mw0v1e5n.fsf@gnu.org> <83lhgczo16.fsf@gnu.org> <55639175.9090005@yandex.ru> <83fv6kysjf.fsf@gnu.org> <556447EF.3050103@yandex.ru> <83bnh7z8c5.fsf@gnu.org> <5564C2C7.5050909@yandex.ru> <837frvywfn.fsf@gnu.org> <55650812.60909@yandex.ru> <83mw0muv5m.fsf@gnu.org> <5569AD7F.2000402@yandex.ru> <83iobautar.fsf@gnu.org> <5569BE61.7010200@yandex.ru> <83a8wmuog6.fsf@gnu.org> <5569D136.90802@yandex.ru> <837frquilf.fsf@gnu.org> <5569F77D.5070903@yandex.ru> <831thxvr7d.fsf@gnu.org> <556A12A2.8030002@yandex.ru> <86y4dlv3xt.fsf@yandex.ru> <83two8vkab.fsf@gnu.org> <56572F51.5050006@yandex.ru> <83egfcvhzi.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 1448596521 8837 80.91.229.3 (27 Nov 2015 03:55:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 03:55:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 20629@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 27 04:55:08 2015 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 1a2A7n-0001Hc-Cx for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 27 Nov 2015 04:55:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54515 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a2A7p-0008Qi-7L for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:55:09 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42636) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a2A7m-0008PG-8u for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:55:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a2A7i-00060a-RS for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:55:06 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:37015) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a2A7i-0005zs-O8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:55:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a2A7i-0007lH-8d for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:55:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Dmitry Gutov Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 03:55:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 20629 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 20629-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B20629.144859648529808 (code B ref 20629); Fri, 27 Nov 2015 03:55:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 20629) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Nov 2015 03:54:45 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54956 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a2A7Q-0007kh-UY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:54:45 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-wm0-f46.google.com ([74.125.82.46]:38526) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1a2A7O-0007kZ-FH for 20629@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:54:42 -0500 Original-Received: by wmec201 with SMTP id c201so42763817wme.1 for <20629@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 19:54:41 -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-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=zyH9yphWmNo71kM894baf+0AVJ69XhQTXWVbqNcVqDE=; b=MaCD5DnnA2TyaF+NhEyFVWIsWmY65uQEWsKzG4oMPdGThWNFuEcNPKyHzHAIkr1tS4 wMVFFTSiKaUUT0GPzoRWyCgriPMzEkpQ+rVonIvnPLlVR8a0eNrlndVErTc8Y7dnM/H7 uuCUkWVhnnlJw72OklvMdtEDvTL7BKPaFNuom+oBJyIFFCBFLzhRor3Rub7LJRBDslHa u3jlp4PgtCn64eexJDIga9AIQ+Td6+yJRM9SxB12jBGfbt68rJumt+J6O0APmACydMDH lGBVilnxBqAqdNc3ZWwGoZ22Sm5IYq3IZpVTbTuSLJnUBMflheKRoUcWgthPH/HPtAKE EmZw== X-Received: by 10.194.204.202 with SMTP id la10mr60068061wjc.81.1448596481718; Thu, 26 Nov 2015 19:54:41 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [10.9.0.103] (nat.webazilla.com. [78.140.128.228]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id m185sm5256303wmf.0.2015.11.26.19.54.40 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 26 Nov 2015 19:54:41 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:42.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/42.0 In-Reply-To: <83egfcvhzi.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x 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:109322 Archived-At: On 11/26/2015 06:32 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > It wasn't done because the discussion didn't reach any consent. FWIW, I left it with understanding that we should learn to generate both qualified and unqualified tag names for C++. Whether to do that by default or not, I'm not sure. But Exuberant Ctags defaults to the latter option, and only generates unqualified tag names by default. It would be a good idea to follow suit, for consistency if nothing else. And I'd like to revisit your previous comment: > Including the pattern (what you call "the implicit tag") in the > completion table could serve as context for disambiguating otherwise > similar tag names. Even if that can work in many cases (patterns are displayed in the xref buffer, for example), pattern won't necessarily contain the qualified name either. In Java, it never will, as long as the pattern is created from the contents of the line with the method's definition (because there's no class name on that line). In C++, it won't if the method is defined inside the class definition (Java-style), which seems to be recommended for short methods.