[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Help etags parse lisp.j
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: Help etags parse lisp.j |
Date: |
Tue, 22 Mar 2016 18:24:42 +0200 |
> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 08:46:59 -0400
>
> > TYPE0 foo (arg1, arg2, arg3, ..., argN)
>
> The first potential difference here is that each arg is
> a single identifier. Of course, in non-K&R declarations, this can also
> be the case, but at least if there's a *, a [..], or two identifiers
> without a comma between them, then we know already it's not K&R.
I thought about this, but concluded that it's too unreliable (as you
point out).
> > Hmm... can we use the fact that in a K&R definition, the last token
> > before the opening brace "{" of the body is always a semicolon? So if
> > there's no semi-colon there, then it's a function that needs to be
> > tagged? (Of course, the semicolon could be hidden behind some clever
> > macro, but I think we don't need to cater to such uses.)
>
> Sounds fine, yes,
I will try to do something useful with this.
- Help etags parse lisp.j, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/03/20
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Andreas Schwab, 2016/03/20
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/03/20
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.h, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/03/20
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Paul Eggert, 2016/03/21
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Andreas Schwab, 2016/03/21
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/03/21
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Stefan Monnier, 2016/03/22
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Stefan Monnier, 2016/03/21
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/03/21
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Paul Eggert, 2016/03/21
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Eli Zaretskii, 2016/03/21
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, John Wiegley, 2016/03/21
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Stefan Monnier, 2016/03/22
- Re: Help etags parse lisp.j, Stefan Monnier, 2016/03/21