>I don't see why TM couldn't be improved to support other, AST-based parsers. >Sure TM is lacking now but we cna fix that. I don't think it's too much work.
Good, modify tag array merging https://github.com/geany/geany/blob/master/src/tagmanager/tm_tag.c#L375 to work on trees that is similarly fast and let's talk then ;-). > But coming back to this PR. I don't think the proposed query API is affected > by the above ideas. It'll always be used to return a list of tags. If the > TMTag structure changes for new features or are subtrees instead of plain > tags is a different story. As I think TM should be used for ctags-like tags, lists should be fine. (They would be insufficient if you needed some AST information, e.g. for code completion.) -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/geany/geany/pull/1187#issuecomment-243165940
