[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: tags for functions
From: |
Ted Zlatanov |
Subject: |
Re: tags for functions |
Date: |
Thu, 22 Jan 2009 08:20:05 -0600 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) |
On Wed, 21 Jan 2009 23:13:47 +0100 Lennart Borgman <address@hidden> wrote:
LB> On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 11:11 PM, Ted Zlatanov <address@hidden> wrote:
LB> I think the idea is nice, but maybe keywords should be used (like in
LB> defcustom etc) for the implementation?
>>
>> "Keywords" is an OK name for the concept; "tags" is the same thing
>> logically but we should stick with what's normal for Emacs Lisp. What's
>> important is to:
LB> I meant something like
LB> (defun my-move-defun ()
LB> "docstring"
LB> :tags '(move)
LB> ...)
OK (I misunderstood you originally but it's not worth explaining :)
Let's go with
(defun my-move-defun ()
"docstring"
:keywords '(move)
...)
to be consistent with "Keywords" in the package headers and other
places.
(defun) would need some small changes at the C level to handle this, but
my question was whether I should use the symbol's plist to store the
keywords, or a global hashtable for speed or something else. It
seems like the symbol plist is the best place logically; are there any
issues with walking the whole namespace to find tags? I don't want this
to be slow.
Ted
- tags for functions, Ted Zlatanov, 2009/01/20
- Re: tags for functions, Glenn Morris, 2009/01/21
- Re: tags for functions, Ted Zlatanov, 2009/01/22
- Re: tags for functions, Juri Linkov, 2009/01/24
- Re: tags for functions, Ted Zlatanov, 2009/01/26
- Re: tags for functions, Juri Linkov, 2009/01/26
- Re: tags for functions, Ted Zlatanov, 2009/01/27
- Re: tags for functions, Juri Linkov, 2009/01/27
- Re: tags for functions, Lennart Borgman, 2009/01/27