From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#28403: 25.2; find-tag works, but xref-find-definitions Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 17:29:32 +0300 Message-ID: <837ex6vd83.fsf@gnu.org> References: <201709092240.v89MeFUo014854@psr.com> <201709100250.v8A2o6nL015568@psr.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1505053821 3405 195.159.176.226 (10 Sep 2017 14:30:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 14:30:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 28403@debbugs.gnu.org, dgutov@yandex.ru To: Winston Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 10 16:30:15 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dr3FM-0008Uh-1O for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 16:30:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53193 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dr3FT-0006dZ-0x for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 10:30:11 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43337) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dr3FN-0006d1-DJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 10:30:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dr3FK-0002yY-AD for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 10:30:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:50805) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dr3FK-0002yQ-7Z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 10:30:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dr3FJ-0000W5-Vu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 10:30:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 14:30:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 28403 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 28403-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B28403.15050537861940 (code B ref 28403); Sun, 10 Sep 2017 14:30:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 28403) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Sep 2017 14:29:46 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59486 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dr3F4-0000VE-H7 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 10:29:46 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52301) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dr3F2-0000Uz-QE for 28403@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 10:29:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dr3Eu-0002sO-Fr for 28403@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 10:29:39 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:33741) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dr3Eu-0002sD-Cg; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 10:29:36 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2732 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dr3Es-00085y-GJ; Sun, 10 Sep 2017 10:29:36 -0400 In-reply-to: <201709100250.v8A2o6nL015568@psr.com> (message from Winston on Sat, 9 Sep 2017 22:50 EDT) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:136729 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 22:50 EDT > From: Winston > > Dmitry kindly replied: > > Which program are you generating TAGS with? Is it etags that comes with > > Emacs? > > Yes, and "etags --version" prints: etags (GNU Emacs 25.2) > > > xref-find-definitions is somewhat stricter about its input than > > find-tag. > > Yes, that's what's causing the difference. ;-) > > > What does the entry for this function inside TAGS look like? [...] > > I'm guessing it looks like: > > > > name _ARGS1( > > Exactly. E.g., > name _ARGS1(^?188,5710 Thanks. Could you please post a complete example of the code in question, including the definition of the _ARGS1 macro, and any other macros and typedefs that would make the example stand-alone? I think I understand what has happened, but I'd like to be sure before we decide what to do about it. > > Try adding `tag-symbol-match-p' to > > etags-xref-find-definitions-tag-order. This example should work then, > > but you'll get more false positives (like treating return types as > > function names). Dmitry, how about providing a more user-friendly customization to that effect? As a "fire escape"? > For the moment I think I'll just continue to use find-tag and hope > that xref-find-definitions will eventually work as well as find-tag > before find-tag disappears. :) I'd rather like to encourage you to continue using xref and report any issue you find. We want to make xref as good as the features it replaces and better. It is already better in several areas: it is much more accurate (so many times lands you right on the spot, whereas find-tag might require to go sequentially through several alternatives), and in the rare cases where there are more than a single candidate, it allows you to select the right one much faster. We would like to solve any remaining problems, and that will be much harder if people don't report those problems to us. It is even possible that, given the details I requested above, I will be able to help you get your use case working with xref, so please don't give up on xref, not just yet. Thanks.