[Geany-devel] In-memory tagmanager parsing
phosphor at xxxxx
Tue Apr 20 14:10:33 UTC 2010
On 04/20/2010 09:56 AM, Nick Treleaven wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Apr 2010 19:51:04 +0200
> Enrico Tröger <enrico.troeger at uvena.de> wrote:
>>>>> parser must care about buffer VS file, wouldn't it be good to
>>>>> abstract this a little more? (with e.g. a little I/O layer - I
>>>>> already started a small library to check if it would be easy to
>>>>> emulate file I/O on buffer, and it seems not to be too hard)
>>>> Yeah, that would be a clean and proper solution and would probably
>>>> solve a lot of problems.
>>>> But before doing this, we need to decide whether we want to stay as
>>>> compatible as possible with the CTags project(which makes very slow
>>>> progress, almost dead) as we did before or whether we would spend
>>>> time on modernising the parsers and adjust them to work more like we
>>>> need it (not sure how many differences there would be at all though).
>>>> Once this decision is made, we can think about your question above
>>>> about an I/O abstracting layer.
>>> Yeah. I might say if it is so dead, it is hope not so far from
>>> blindness to wait for updates and fixes from it.
>>> But OTHO I completely understand that the simple idea of being the
>>> maintainer of it might be quite... scary.
>> That's the question for now, I guess. If we decide to not try to stay
>> compatible with CTags we maybe could adjust the parsers more easily to
>> fit our needs, especially to read data from a buffer and we could
>> easily use GLib functions in the parsers which could make the code a
>> bit easier and other things.
>> From what I noticed (mainly reading svn log of the CTags repository),
>> it sees a few commits every few weeks or months mostly with fixes but no
>> real progress.
>> I think we could go away and push our tagmanager copy into our
>> direction but OTOH it might be not even worth.
>> Not sure.
>> What about the others, any opinions?
> I think we should try to stay fairly compatible with CTags as other
> projects use it also and may make improvements to their copies.
> But IMO it's OK to change the I/O functions.
> Geany-devel mailing list
> Geany-devel at uvena.de
How does Monodevelop handle it's tag manager as unlike Anjuta and Geany
the tags always point to the correct line?
More information about the Devel