On Fri, 5 Sep 2008 01:16:55 +0200, Frank Lanitz frank@frank.uvena.de wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 20:08:59 +0200 Enrico Tröger enrico.troeger@uvena.de wrote:
Geany doesn't support this format for CSS (yet). There are two possible solutions: a) we add the CSS filetype to the list of filetypes which use this format (pipe-separated). But this would only affect the SVN version, you still wouldn't be able to use your file with Geany 0.14 b) you or someone else write a script which converts your file into the native tagmanager format.
I'd prefer a) as your list is 'generated' manually and not by a script and so the pipe-separated format is easier to maintain but it's not possible without changing the source code.
I'd still prefer a) and like to get it working if there are no objections.
I'm still not 100% what is the best way. But we shouldn't look back to much to Geany 0.14. Even though 0.15 will might take some more time, the solution should be something that is working for all tag file in the same way. Providing data pipe seperated and in tagmanager style mixed up will be ugly to maintain I guess.
Hmm, 'ugly to maintain'? Maintaining a binary file is less ugly than a pipe-separated tag file? The problem with the tagmanager format is that it mostly can't be edited. And so, for the Pascal or LaTeX tag files you need to get them parsed but probably they can't be parsed with the current code. This is why there is another, easier format.
I don't think having all tags file in the tagmanager format would make them easier to maintain. Of course, this is true for real generated file like the globals tags file for C/C++. But probably not for other formats. Same for the PHP tags file which is parsed from a text file from the PHP project. To get it generated by the tagmanager code you would need to generate a PHP file with all these information so that it could be parsed by the PHP parser and then written to a tags file. But IIRC then function signatures (return values, argument lists) are lost and we just loose information compared to the current way.
After all, if we have decided how to proceed, I agree with Frank to include this list in Geany if you, Gavin, agree.
In the meantime I would disagree to this and instead provide the file on www.geany.org/Download/Extras for download.
In addition to this, we might could store them inside the genay-plugin subversion repository and doing maybe a daily svn export to the webserver.
No, we don't want this, as we already discussed some time before. Having links to user-provided tag files in the Wiki on the Download/Extras page is fine and if someone needs webspace for hosting such files, just contact me.
Regards, Enrico