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: tags for functions Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:52:04 -0500 Message-ID: References: <867i4pemv5.fsf@lifelogs.com> <86y6x49un4.fsf@lifelogs.com> <86ljt39ysz.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87tz7oxodr.fsf@jurta.org> <86mydd3kzv.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87pri9k64b.fsf@jurta.org> <86ljsw252p.fsf@lifelogs.com> <87hc3kfgb8.fsf@jurta.org> <86r62ne3aq.fsf@lifelogs.com> <86bptrdv4f.fsf@lifelogs.com> <861vuldgmu.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1233265969 21646 80.91.229.12 (29 Jan 2009 21:52:49 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:52:49 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ted Zlatanov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 29 22:54:00 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1LSepO-0006Bm-Ov for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 22:53:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35864 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LSeo6-0000Th-GO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:52:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LSeo0-0000Sd-WE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:52:13 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LSenu-0000Ot-6C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:52:12 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59957 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LSent-0000Oi-Q8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:52:05 -0500 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:34894) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LSent-0002AQ-AY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:52:05 -0500 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Ag4FABe0gUnO+LLC/2dsb2JhbACBbsp9hBAGgkU X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.37,346,1231131600"; d="scan'208";a="32997879" Original-Received: from 206-248-178-194.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([206.248.178.194]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 29 Jan 2009 16:52:04 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 64B617F9B; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:52:04 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <861vuldgmu.fsf@lifelogs.com> (Ted Zlatanov's message of "Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:03:21 -0600") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:108379 Archived-At: SM> Stefan "who still doesn't know what data we're talking about" >>> I'm interested in "@keyword" substrings of the docstring that indicate >>> the keywords for a particular function. The goals are to: >>> - list all keywords >>> - list all keywords for a function >>> - list all functions for a keyword SM> Not know what that data would be used for, it's hard to give you SM> good feedback. > The goal is to do the three operations above as an API. This is not "what it's used for", it's "how it's provided". > Then Emacs will use it, for example, to show related functions in C-h f > The package can also provide browsing by keyword, as finder.el does. I see, thanks. The list of related functions can be rather long, so it's probably better to only add a "show related" button in C-h f and only show the list when the user asks for it. > 1) modify defun-after-hook so new defun calls will be noted, or install > advice on defun (I'd rather do the former) I'd rather to try to avoid both. > 2) scan existing docstrings over mapatoms using `documentation' (it's > slow now apparently, so it will need to be optimized for a batch scan) If it's only done "once per session" and only when the user specifically asks for this info, it's probably not that bad. > I only need defun-after-hook to be approved, I can do the rest. Do you > agree it's useful or would you rather not provide such a hook? I'm not convinced. I'm not even sure this kind of info will turn out to be useful/usable. Currently, you'd spend all your time scanning docstrings that don't contain any such keywords. Adding those keywords to docstrings would be a major undertaking. So it's probably better to start with data from elsewhere (e.g. from the elisp manual) anyway. In other words, maybe a defun-after-hook ill be the right tool, but we're pretty far from being in a position to judge, and it seems likely that the end design will use a completely different approach anyway. Stefan