From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Francesco =?UTF-8?Q?Potort=C3=AC?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#20629: 25.0.50; Regression: TAGS broken, can't find anything in C++ files. Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 14:34:55 +0200 Organization: CNR-ISTI, via Moruzzi 1, I-56124 Pisa, +39-0503153058 Message-ID: References: <555EC552.5010600@swipnet.se> <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> <831ti2yu1a.fsf@gnu.org> <5565E28A.5040507@yandex.ru> <83wpzuxbtd.fsf@gnu.org> <5565E8AB.5020107@yandex.ru> <83r3q2xa3q.fsf@gnu.org> <5566583F.7020503@yandex.ru> <83h9qxxvo4.fsf@gnu.org> <5566EC49.8010907@yandex.ru> <837frsycly.fsf@gnu.org> <5567351E.7020006@yandex.ru> <83zj4owthp.fsf@gnu.org> <5567AE52.1000600@yandex.ru> <1nvbfbri92.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83h9qvx0t7.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1432903002 25261 80.91.229.3 (29 May 2015 12:36:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 12:36:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 20629@debbugs.gnu.org, Richard Stallman , dgutov@yandex.ru To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri May 29 14:36:26 2015 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 1YyJWJ-0003LO-Iv for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 May 2015 14:36:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35580 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YyJWJ-0008Iy-2D for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 May 2015 08:36:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39095) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YyJWD-0008FG-5i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2015 08:36:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YyJW8-0000jk-23 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2015 08:36:09 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:50123) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YyJW7-0000jc-Qf for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2015 08:36:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YyJW7-0005Fj-4l for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2015 08:36:03 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Francesco =?UTF-8?Q?Potort=C3=AC?= Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 12:36:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 20629 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 20629-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B20629.143290290420088 (code B ref 20629); Fri, 29 May 2015 12:36:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 20629) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 May 2015 12:35:04 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60098 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YyJV7-0005Dd-SC for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2015 08:35:03 -0400 Original-Received: from blade3.isti.cnr.it ([194.119.192.19]:30679) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YyJV4-0005DG-TP for 20629@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2015 08:35:00 -0400 Original-Received: from tucano.isti.cnr.it ([146.48.81.102]) by mx.isti.cnr.it (PMDF V6.5-x6 #32097) with ESMTPSA id <01PMJT97SOIIMEMV8Q@mx.isti.cnr.it> for 20629@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 29 May 2015 14:34:54 +0200 (MEST) Original-Received: from pot by tucano.isti.cnr.it with local (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1YyJV1-0000hk-Gg; Fri, 29 May 2015 14:34:55 +0200 In-reply-to: <83h9qvx0t7.fsf@gnu.org> X-INSM-ip-source: 146.48.81.102 Auth Done X-fingerprint: 4B02 6187 5C03 D6B1 2E31 7666 09DF 2DC9 BE21 6115 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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:103305 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii: >> From: Glenn Morris >> Cc: Eli Zaretskii , 20629@debbugs.gnu.org >> Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 02:48:57 -0400 >> >> Dmitry Gutov wrote: >> >> > If you want my opinion (please keep in mind: not an etags user), >> > following in Exuberant Ctags's footsteps sounds best. >> >> I'm not one either, but I've been meaning to ask: why is etags in Emacs? > >The answer to that is lost in history (for me). Perhaps Richard and >Francesco (cc'ed) will remember. When Etags was written, the only alternative was the traditional Unix Ctags, to which Etags was an improvement. Since Etags is able to produce traditional Ctags-style files, yuo can look at the macro CTAGS in etags.c to spot the differences. This is a historical summary: * 1983 Ctags originally by Ken Arnold. * 1984 Fortran added by Jim Kleckner. * 1984 Ed Pelegri-Llopart added C typedefs. * 1985 Emacs TAGS format by Richard Stallman. * 1989 Sam Kendall added C++. * 1992 Joseph B. Wells improved C and C++ parsing. * 1993 Francesco Potortì reorganized C and C++. * 1994 Line-by-line regexp tags by Tom Tromey. * 2001 Nested classes by Francesco Potortì (concept by Mykola Dzyuba). * 2002 #line directives by Francesco Potortì. /* Define CTAGS to make the program "ctags" compatible with the usual one. Leave it undefined to make the program "etags", which makes emacs-style tag tables and tags typedefs, #defines and struct/union/enum by default. */ >But since it is here, it is, IMO, a Good Thing, because we can easily >affect its operation where it's important to us. Especially lately, >when the front-end was changed, and the new one has different >expectations. Yes. This is important. Obviously, this could be done in any similar program having an --emacs option (see for example ls --dired). >> It's my (superficial) impression that etags hasn't progressed much since >> then. The majority of the changes seem to have been generic code-cleanup >> stuff. > >That's not true, there were a couple of non-trivial changes lately >that are not cleanups, and I think there will be one more soon. This >thread discusses some of them, the other one is discussed here: > > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-05/msg00291.html There have been significant bug squashing, tagging improvements and language supporting features added at least until 2004. Very few after that time from my part. >> Is it that etags recognizes Emacs-specific C code that ctags does not? > >Which ctags do you allude to here? There are quite a few of them out >there. > >> My only motivation for asking is that it's good to reduce the number of >> things that need to be maintained in Emacs, where possible. > >I don't think we should remove this one, no. This is from an old mail, referring to around 2004: >In fact, some years ago I run an in-depth comparison between etags and >exhuberant ctags, with mixed results. None excelled clearly with >respect to the other. Only two functionality I missed in etags: the >ability to read directories (with optional recursion) and the ability to >generate the new tags types introduced by ctags. On the other hand, Ex-C is much more customisable on the command line and has a much clearer code (even if I don't know whether this in fact translates to easier code management). At that time, I had even had an email exchange with Ex-c authors to try and merge the code bases, but this did not went on for lack of time. So Etags was not bad at all some ten years ago. I don't know if Ex-c or others have significantly progressed in the meantime.