Re: etags: M-. jump to the tag(called func), but then how can i jump BACK(the calling line)?

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Ilya Zakharevich <nospam-abuse@ilyaz.org> writes:

> [A complimentary Cc of this posting was sent to
> David Kastrup 
> <dak@gnu.org>], who wrote in article <85acih4cmy.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>:
>> >> > This is a gaping hole in the Emacs UI.  I wrote a package,
>> >> > imenu-go.el, which behaves "as expected".
>
>> >> Hardly.
>
>> This means the "gaping hole".
>
> Sorry that I was not clear enough: I understood this.
>
>> > a) Can't parse your last paragraph;
>> 
>> It was just the online help.
>
> Kevin Rodgers provided a very nice roundup; can it replace this
> cryptic paragraph?
>
>> So you want to claim a deficiency in Emacs because you don't want to
>> try out the function and keybinding which it provides for that
>> purpose?
>
> Again, sorry that I was not clear enough.  On the contrary, I'm very
> glad that finally, after more than a decade of bitching (while having
> the working code available!) this feature is finally available in the
> standard distribution.  A lot of thanks for including it!

You could have cut your decade of bitching short.  The function was
provided in 1998, more than 7 years ago.

> All that I said is that
>
>   a) I have no incentive to check whether the Emacs 21.4
>      implementation is sane; and

Well, then you should also have no incentive to bitch about it.

>   b) that my prior experience does not allow for a lot of hope in
>   "a" (I remember there was *some* tricky stuff to code in imenu-go;
>   but the only thing which immeditely jumps to mind is not related
>   to return-back functionality; so, contrary to what I wrote, it is
>   quite possible that there is no pitfall to avoid...).

So you reserve the right for bitching without checking whether it is
warranted?

> Hope this helps,

I don't see how this helps with anything except giving a good idea how
serious to take any of your bitching in future.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum