On Sun, 11 Mar 2018 18:40:26 +0100, Thomas Dickey <dic...@his.com> wrote:


no problem - I see what's going on now.  The reason it's been working for
me was that (I'd forgotten of course) one of my fixes from last year

of course. good to see that I am not the only one forgetting about stuff ;)

allows
dots in the names.

 20170820 (t)
        > Tom Dickey:
        + modify character class assumed for tags, to check for graphic
          characters.  Previously that used qident (cf: 9.7g), which did not
          allow for dots in filenames which could be present in a ctags file if
          it were generated using "ctags --extra=+f *" (Savannah #51774).

The actual change is small:

REV:1.150               tags.c              2017/08/20 23:08:32       tom
tags:            v9_8s6

allow tags (read from a tags file) to be any graphic character. It turns out
   that Hiebert's ctags can point to filenames vs identifiers.

--- tags.c      2013/09/20 23:00:36     1.149
+++ tags.c      2017/08/20 23:08:32     1.150
@@ -212,7 +212,7 @@
                return;         /* ignore super-long identifiers */
            }
            c = lgetc(lp, got);
-           if (!isqident(c))
+           if (!isGraph(c))
                break;
            my_name[got] = (char) c;
        }


indeed... with this patch it is working perfectly. really thanks a lot! regarding your changelog comment: in fact it (the appearance of `.' or whatever in the tagnames) can also occur more generally -- as in my case -- if one uses ctags `--regex' for handling of some language unknown to ctagss - such as `R'...

I've been working on lynx for the past few weeks,
thinking to get vile up to date after that's done.

that would be great. as far as I am concerned `vile' remains by far the most likeable `vi' look-alike around. --

FYI, I've just noted that at the end of the `make' run the output reads

...
make[1]: `libvlflt.a' is up to date.
mv vile ovile
mv: rename vile to ovile: No such file or directory
make: [vile] Error 1 (ignored)
...

it seems the Makefile tries to mv a previously build binary to the side, but after a preceding `make clean' it simply isn't there? this sure is innocuous but should the warning not better be silenced (or tested for existence of `vile' before trying to mv it)?

thanks again,
joerg





--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

_______________________________________________
vile mailing list
vile@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/vile

Reply via email to