From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#20629: 25.0.50; Regression: TAGS broken, can't find anything in C++ files. Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2016 20:45:20 +0200 Message-ID: <83twk271dr.fsf@gnu.org> 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> <5657D3FF.4000703@yandex.ru> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1458413179 17298 80.91.229.3 (19 Mar 2016 18:46:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2016 18:46:19 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 20629-done@debbugs.gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Mar 19 19:46:08 2016 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 1ahLt1-0006uh-VN for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 19:46:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50054 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ahLt1-0001qL-An for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 14:46:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57521) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ahLsx-0001nN-5e for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 14:46:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ahLsw-0003MQ-9c for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 14:46:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:56787) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ahLsw-0003ML-6J for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 14:46:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ahLsw-0004DE-2D for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 14:46:02 -0400 Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 19 Mar 2016 18:46:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 20629 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Mail-Followup-To: 20629@debbugs.gnu.org, eliz@gnu.org, jan.h.d@swipnet.se Original-Received: via spool by 20629-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D20629.145841316016177 (code D ref 20629); Sat, 19 Mar 2016 18:46:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 20629-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Mar 2016 18:46:00 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53913 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ahLst-0004Cr-SP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 14:46:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38278) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ahLsr-0004Cd-C8 for 20629-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 14:45:58 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ahLsj-0003L7-13 for 20629-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 14:45:52 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:33788) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ahLsi-0003L3-Tw; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 14:45:48 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4474 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ahLsi-0007aZ-5O; Sat, 19 Mar 2016 14:45:48 -0400 In-reply-to: <5657D3FF.4000703@yandex.ru> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Fri, 27 Nov 2015 05:54:39 +0200) 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-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:115098 Archived-At: > Cc: 20629@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2015 05:54:39 +0200 > > 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. As we now have a dedicated feature request (bug#22995), I'm closing this bug.