[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Generalizing find-definition
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: Generalizing find-definition |
Date: |
Sun, 02 Nov 2014 10:34:28 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4.50 (gnu/linux) |
> M-. is bound to a new command `find-definition', which primarily calls
> the value of a new variable `find-definition-function' (by default a
> wrapper around `find-tag' to keep the current functionality intact).
> `find-definition' also keeps track of the tag ring, so this would move
> `find-tag-marker-ring' and related functionality out of etags.el, too.
Yes, this sounds great.
> M-* is the standard opposite command for this, so that would be
> extracted as well. SLIME and a few other modes re-define M-, to be the
> opposite for M-. instead for easier navigation. How do you feel about
> swapping the definition of M-, and M-* in etags.el?
That's incompatible with the current M-, binding.
What would then be the equivalent of the current M-, ?
> C-M-. is currently bound to find-tag-regexp. There is currently no
> standard functionality in Emacs to find the callers of a symbol at
> point, which might be nice to put on C-M-. if it is defined at some
> point for symmetry reasons.
M-. RET does "find the callers of a symbol at point", AFAICT.
> Comments?
I'm all for it,
Stefan
- Generalizing find-definition, Jorgen Schaefer, 2014/11/02
- Re: Generalizing find-definition,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: Generalizing find-definition, Stefan Monnier, 2014/11/02
- Re: Generalizing find-definition, Helmut Eller, 2014/11/03
- Re: Generalizing find-definition, Jorgen Schaefer, 2014/11/03
- Re: Generalizing find-definition, Stephen Leake, 2014/11/03
- Re: Generalizing find-definition, Stefan Monnier, 2014/11/03