[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#22692: 25.0.91; xref-find-definitions fails to prompt

From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: bug#22692: 25.0.91; xref-find-definitions fails to prompt
Date: Sat, 20 Feb 2016 03:28:44 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:44.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/44.0

On 02/19/2016 10:24 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
From: Dmitry Gutov <address@hidden>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2016 20:52:28 +0200

On 02/19/2016 08:37 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

No, I meant the change you wanted to make in finding the symbol at
point, to avoid looking for it anywhere on the same line.

Isn't that orthogonal to the question of using the word "valid"?

Maybe.  I don't tend thinking of documentation as a collection of
words.  When you change how the symbol is determined, I could reason
about describing that.  I agree that the chances of having "valid"
there are rather small.

Collection of behaviors, then. We're thinking of two axes. The one touched on in this subthread is "valid" (i.e. whether the symbol must be tested against the completion table before it can be used as the default value; apparently we've settled on "no").

The other is whether we look for the symbol "at" point, or are we also allowed to look "near" point (within the current line), if there's no symbol at point. So far we've got two votes for "no" as well.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]