From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Cc: dwm@meer.net, od@suse.de, darren@users.sourceforge.net,
Bram@vim.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH, RFC] etags/ctags v22.0.92 break Linux kernel `make TAGS/tags`
Date: Sat, 30 Dec 2006 20:45:35 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <E1H0plX-0004xi-4I@fencepost.gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <E1H0d7z-00012g-Ud@tucano.isti.cnr.it> (message from Francesco Potorti` on Sat, 30 Dec 2006 13:15:55 +0100)
Now I am asking: is there really any reason why Ctags should not create
duplicate entries? Why not creating duplicate entries by default? The
only drawback would be that the old Vi would jump to an unpredictable
one, but the current behaviour is not much better, because only the
first duplicate tag is created, the others are not included in the tags
file.
That seems plausible. And why care about the old (non-free) vi anyway?
Olaf Dabrunz cites this proposed standard, used by at least Exhuberant
ctags and Vim: <http://ctags.sourceforge.net/FORMAT>, where the issue is
better explained.
I cannot access that page. If this is relevant, would you please
explain how?
In summary, I have three proposals for a change to Ctags, preferred first:
1. Duplicate entries are created, no warnings issued
2. Duplicate entries are created, warnings issued as they are now
3. An option is provided to create duplicate entries
I see no harm in #1 if that is what people would generally prefer.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-31 1:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-24 20:01 [PATCH, RFC] etags/ctags v22.0.92 break Linux kernel `make TAGS/tags` Don Mullis
2006-12-25 5:41 ` Masatake YAMATO
2006-12-25 16:47 ` Don Mullis
2006-12-25 22:36 ` Francesco Potorti`
2006-12-26 14:13 ` Francesco Potorti`
2006-12-26 18:43 ` Don Mullis
2006-12-28 0:10 ` Francesco Potorti`
2006-12-28 5:48 ` Don Mullis
2006-12-28 10:21 ` Francesco Potorti`
2006-12-29 22:58 ` Richard Stallman
2006-12-30 20:36 ` Don Mullis
2006-12-31 1:46 ` Richard Stallman
2006-12-27 2:59 ` Richard Stallman
2006-12-30 12:15 ` Francesco Potorti`
2006-12-31 1:45 ` Richard Stallman [this message]
2007-01-02 11:41 ` Francesco Potorti`
2007-01-02 14:26 ` Frank Schmitt
2007-01-03 1:24 ` Francesco Potorti`
2007-01-03 12:06 ` Frank Schmitt
2007-01-03 14:33 ` Frank Schmitt
[not found] ` <m38xgk47lc.fsf@mid.gehheimdienst.de>
2007-02-05 8:25 ` Francesco Potorti`
2007-01-02 21:24 ` Richard Stallman
2007-01-03 0:40 ` Francesco Potorti`
2007-01-02 21:24 ` Eli Zaretskii
2007-01-03 0:42 ` Francesco Potorti`
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=E1H0plX-0004xi-4I@fencepost.gnu.org \
--to=rms@gnu.org \
--cc=Bram@vim.org \
--cc=darren@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=dwm@meer.net \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=od@suse.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.