From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: IDE versus emacs Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2012 09:01:52 +0200 Message-ID: <83pq4w6q3j.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83d30y87yi.fsf@gnu.org> <83626q7zvk.fsf@gnu.org> <87y5jl243r.fsf@gmail.com> <87pq4xbqup.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87d30xatgo.fsf@wanadoo.es> <20121006041754.GA30224@hysteria.proulx.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1349506943 26226 80.91.229.3 (6 Oct 2012 07:02:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2012 07:02:23 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 06 09:02:29 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-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 1TKOP5-0007fC-UZ for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2012 09:02:28 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45703 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TKOP0-0003MT-4h for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2012 03:02:22 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:34509) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TKOOu-0003MO-6A for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2012 03:02:17 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TKOOt-0001as-9W for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2012 03:02:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:37166) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TKOOt-0001ao-19 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2012 03:02:15 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MBG00B00M4OUS00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2012 09:02:03 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MBG00BKHM7FMI20@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2012 09:02:03 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.172 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:87104 Archived-At: > From: Tima > Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2012 22:43:56 -0700 > > > I have always used TAGs tables created using the etags comand for > > this. Then M-. , C-x 5 . and so forth. > > Yes, I used TAGs in the past. Well documented in the emacs manual and works as expected. > > I remember it could not always find the definition though. I think to get on par with what people called "IDE" the tag system has to understand the language semantics. And this, as Jai said, is indeed what Semantic (a part of CEDET) claims to do. I was wondering whether it is the state of the art or there is a simpler and better successor. At least in C and C++, tags never miss a definition for me. My only problem with tags is that they sometimes show me more definitions other than what I had in mind that match the symbol I type, either because of case insensitivity or because of partial matches.