From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Generalizing find-definition Date: Sun, 02 Nov 2014 10:34:28 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20141102151524.0d9c665c@forcix> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1414942495 13115 80.91.229.3 (2 Nov 2014 15:34:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 15:34:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jorgen Schaefer Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 02 16:34:48 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1XkxB1-0005iU-OB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2014 16:34:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57658 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XkxB1-0006bZ-DB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2014 10:34:47 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51081) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XkxAr-0006aM-5j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2014 10:34:45 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XkxAj-00027Q-M3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2014 10:34:37 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:59740) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XkxAj-00027K-IW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Nov 2014 10:34:29 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Au4MAOatTlRFpY87/2dsb2JhbABcgw6DYoZ+y1MEAgKBHBcBAXyEAwEBAwFWIwULCw4mEhQYDSSISwnLcgEBAQEGAQEBAR6RCAeESwWLZKY8gW+EFh+CegEBAQ X-IPAS-Result: Au4MAOatTlRFpY87/2dsb2JhbABcgw6DYoZ+y1MEAgKBHBcBAXyEAwEBAwFWIwULCw4mEhQYDSSISwnLcgEBAQEGAQEBAR6RCAeESwWLZKY8gW+EFh+CegEBAQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.04,797,1406606400"; d="scan'208";a="95793475" Original-Received: from 69-165-143-59.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home) ([69.165.143.59]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA; 02 Nov 2014 10:34:28 -0500 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 11D5666108; Sun, 2 Nov 2014 10:34:28 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20141102151524.0d9c665c@forcix> (Jorgen Schaefer's message of "Sun, 2 Nov 2014 15:15:24 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.181 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:176236 Archived-At: > M-. is bound to a new command `find-definition', which primarily calls > the value of a new variable `find-definition-function' (by default a > wrapper around `find-tag' to keep the current functionality intact). > `find-definition' also keeps track of the tag ring, so this would move > `find-tag-marker-ring' and related functionality out of etags.el, too. Yes, this sounds great. > M-* is the standard opposite command for this, so that would be > extracted as well. SLIME and a few other modes re-define M-, to be the > opposite for M-. instead for easier navigation. How do you feel about > swapping the definition of M-, and M-* in etags.el? That's incompatible with the current M-, binding. What would then be the equivalent of the current M-, ? > C-M-. is currently bound to find-tag-regexp. There is currently no > standard functionality in Emacs to find the callers of a symbol at > point, which might be nice to put on C-M-. if it is defined at some > point for symmetry reasons. M-. RET does "find the callers of a symbol at point", AFAICT. > Comments? I'm all for it, Stefan