bug#12518: outline-minor-mode doesn't work well in C(++) mode

bug#12518: outline-minor-mode doesn't work well in C(++) mode

[Stefan Monnier]

As the subject says.
It's not getting enough love,


        Stefan

bug#12518: outline-minor-mode doesn't work well in C(++) mode

[Stefan Kangas]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:

> As the subject says.
> It's not getting enough love,

That was 12 years ago, and it has gotten a little bit of attention at
least in the time since.  Could you summarize some of the current issues
with `outline-minor-mode'?

It works relatively okay here, FWIW.  But I'm not a heavy user.

bug#12518: outline-minor-mode doesn't work well in C(++) mode

[Stefan Monnier via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors]

> That was 12 years ago, and it has gotten a little bit of attention at
> least in the time since.  Could you summarize some of the current issues
> with `outline-minor-mode'?

I stopped trying to use Outline minor mode in C and can't remember what
were the main annoyances.  Obviously my bug report was ...hmmm... really
poor, so it's not worth keeping.

IIRC I think one of the main things I wanted was to be able to fold "a
function" so we'd keep a single line for that function, whereas
currently a function like:

    static void
    myfun (blabla
           blabla)
    {
      bla blabla;
    }

is treated as 3 independent "headings".


        Stefan

bug#12518: outline-minor-mode doesn't work well in C(++) mode

[Juri Linkov]

>> That was 12 years ago, and it has gotten a little bit of attention at
>> least in the time since.  Could you summarize some of the current issues
>> with `outline-minor-mode'?
>
> I stopped trying to use Outline minor mode in C and can't remember what
> were the main annoyances.  Obviously my bug report was ...hmmm... really
> poor, so it's not worth keeping.
>
> IIRC I think one of the main things I wanted was to be able to fold "a
> function" so we'd keep a single line for that function, whereas
> currently a function like:
>
>     static void
>     myfun (blabla
>            blabla)
>     {
>       bla blabla;
>     }
>
> is treated as 3 independent "headings".

The most reliable way would be to rely on the tree-sitter.
There is already treesit-simple-imenu-settings, but it has
no information about levels, and I have not figured out yet
how to get it.  But anyway this should be in a separate
feature request.