Give me some time to look over the Exuberant Ctags code-base and I'll see what I can do. Can there be some general discussion with, exactly what are the shortcomings of the current parser:
- Is there a problem with ctags not understanding that entity blocks and architecture blocks are connected in a fundamental way? - Are there library functions and constructs that are just too much for the current implementation? What do those look like? - Is ctags recognition outdated? - Is it ctags job to recognize things like flipflops, muxers or non-synthesizable constructs? I know the topic was on a project of larger scope but, for an IDE ctags is an important part of what people expect from one. Without good parsing support, the market for the up-and-coming IDE will be blasé at best. With this and that I work a full time job in mind, don't expect sudden results; If there is a wanting for new features I will do my best. cheers, Nicki On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 2:48 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Jul 21, 2014 12:02 PM, < [email protected] > wrote: > > > > > > > I'm a C programmer looking for a good project; I'm on board. > > > > > > If you are interested in ctags for vhdl (not a big project), > > > you can write down how the ctags would look for a vhdl unit > > > and I can implement the writer part. That opens many paths > > > for reader tools. > > > > Not going to lie but, I have never gotten a working simulation of > > VHDL code. > > There are ghdl binary images on sourceforge; do not hesitate to ask > for help. > > > I know how ctags works though and I'm willing to help. > > > > Are you asking that I hand write a ctags file for a vhdl snip-it? > > That's certainly a good starting point. > > > How complex does it need to be? > > As soon as this is tractable and usable, that would be good. > > Tristan. >
_______________________________________________ Ghdl-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/ghdl-discuss
