bug-global
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: gtags.el suggestion


From: John Watson
Subject: Re: gtags.el suggestion
Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 21:34:43 -0800

I will work on cleaning it up.  The general idea is there.  I like giving people the option for a/synchronicity as well.  Will post with a patch later...

Thanks,
John Watson

On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 6:24 PM, Shigio YAMAGUCHI <address@hidden> wrote:
Hi,
> Cleaned up goto-tag code with flag/options table. Also reworked many of the
> interactive functions to allow for searching for tags locally.
> Calls global asynchronously (using start-process rather than call-process)
> so that if you specify a symbol that is found in many files and takes a long
> time to run, you can still move around and edit in emacs while you wait.

It seems that there are four changes in your patch.

1. Use of flag table (gtags-flag-table)

       It's smart. But thinking about the work of debugging,
       I am hesitant to take it.

       There is a merit of using flag value itself directly.
       Because the flag value is equal to the flag value of
       the command line of global(1) except for "C"(--from-here=<...>).
       Understanding the flag value, what should be done is clear.

2. Small changes of display

       o Change the name of [GTAGS SELECT MODE] page from '...(R)' to '...(Ref)'.
       o Change the message "Searching <tag name> ..." to "!!!!! ...".

       Are these necessary? (for debugging?)

3. Asynchronous searching

       It's great.

       Since some people dislike asynchronous behavior, I would like to use
       custom variable.

       (setq gtags-mode-hook
         '(lambda ()
           (setq gtags-asynchronous-search t)
       ))

4. Adding local flag to each interactive functions

       How to use this facility?
       Which range is local?

If possible, would you please write a change in a patch?
Generally, it is difficult to apply the patch which contains many changes
which are not mutually related.
Anyway, thank you!
--
Shigio YAMAGUCHI <address@hidden>
PGP fingerprint: D1CB 0B89 B346 4AB6 5663  C4B6 3CA5 BBB3 57BE DDA3


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]