|Subject:||Re: Exploring a code base?|
|Date:||Sat, 07 Nov 2020 14:33:25 +0000|
|User-agent:||Alpine 2.22 (NEB 394 2020-01-19)|
Maybe you could step back and describe in a bit more detail what kind of workflow you are trying to support, and how that contributes to the kind of code-base exploring job you have in mind. I do this quite a lot, and IME a combination of M-. and M-? (with the latter using the back-end of ID Utils, if possible) is entirely adequate. In particular, I don't think I ever was in the need of some graph to refactor a data type, I only needed to examine its uses.Basically, I'm asking why having a flat list of all the users of a data type, and reading the code of all of them, is not enough for this kind of job? What am I missing?
IIUC, Yuri, Stefan and Dmitry all described the same problem, each with their own words: using M-. and M-? works fine for simple tasks (say, change the name of a given function or struct field in a codebase, or see where a given type is used), but when you are tackling a more complex task you often have to put searches on a kind of "stack", on which you can save your current search state, and from which you can resume your current search at a later stage. Say, you are making changes to the occurrences of "foo", and at some point during that work you see that you need to change something around the occurrences of "bar", and at some point during that work you see that you need to change the occurrences of "baz", and so forth.
|[Prev in Thread]||Current Thread||[Next in Thread]|