better generation of vi ctags in ghci
phercek at gmail.com
Thu Jul 2 08:11:33 EDT 2009
On Wed, 17 Jun 2009 13:59:24 +0200, Peter Hercek wrote:
>>> * If your code happens to have definitions on lines which happen to
>>> exist more times in one source file then it may put you at an
>>> incorrect location. I doubt it will ever happen but if anybody thinks
>>> it is really bad we can keep the original format of vim tags too. Then
>>> e.g. :ctags would generate tags with line numbers and :ctags! would
>>> generate tags with search expressions.
>> See above for other things that can go wrong with search-based tags, so
>> I'd prefer to have both options.
> Ok, I can add it. Generating line numbers instead of search patterns
> will be quicker too. For big projects, the time difference may be
> So what about UI? :ctags would generate tags with line numbers and
> :ctags! would generate tags with search patterns? Or will we add an
> argument to :ctags to specify what kind of tags we want? This option
> would break ghci UI backward compatibility.
Looks like nobody cares enough to respond. Do we have at least a
"general agreement" of two for :ctags[!] user interface?
Is "general agreement" of two and nobody caring enough to respond
good enough for a merge?
If nobody responds to this I'll assume there is no general agreement
and I'll maintain the patch only for myself.
More information about the Glasgow-haskell-users