[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-.
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-. |
Date: |
Tue, 28 Apr 2015 17:50:55 +0300 |
> Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 01:15:16 +0300
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> CC: 19468@debbugs.gnu.org
>
> I certainly hope that at least the Semantic one materializes soon
> enough, otherwise it sounds like all this move to xref was for the
> benefit of unbundled packages, and users of Emacs are just punished by
> having to learn a new UI for no real advantage.
>
> It's probably up to CEDET developers.
I hope they are reading this. (Personally, I'd expect the back-ends
for at least the most popular languages be ready before the switch to
the new API and the new UI, but that's me.)
> But the UI itself is one of the benefits. If the old one was considered
> superior, the new API could have been introduced without really changing the
> UI.
I didn't ask for the old UI; I can still have it if I want it. This
bug report is about improving the new UI.
> . The doc string of xref-find-function mentions several
> variants of
> invoking the function, but there doesn't seem to be any way
> of
> controlling that when invoking the function interactively,
> is
> there? I think it would be good to be able to lookup only
> the
> definitions or only the references of a symbol.
>
> There seems some confusion here: you do now invoke xref-find-function. It's
> not a function anyway, it's a variable, which different backends can set to
> implement the backend interface.
Then the confusion is the doc string's fault: it should make this
aspect clear. And if there are no back-ends currently that support
these options, I'd suggest to remove that from the doc string -- we
shouldn't advertise in the docs stuff that no one implemented.
> Not from me: I've been told in this discussion that I don't understand
> the new UI, don't appreciate its many virtues, and generally am no
> more than an obstacle on the way of progress.
>
> I really don't remember stating that in this discussion.
Indeed, you didn't. But you are not alone in this discussion.
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., (continued)
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/04/29
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/04/28
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Dmitry Gutov, 2015/04/28
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/04/29
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Dmitry Gutov, 2015/04/29
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/04/29
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Dmitry Gutov, 2015/04/27
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-.,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Dmitry Gutov, 2015/04/28
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/04/29
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Dmitry Gutov, 2015/04/29
bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/04/27
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Stefan Monnier, 2015/04/27
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/04/27
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Stefan Monnier, 2015/04/27
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Dmitry Gutov, 2015/04/27
- bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/04/28
bug#19468: 25.0.50; UI inconveniences with M-., Eli Zaretskii, 2015/04/28