Re: xref-find-matches and stuff

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 05/12/2015 05:36 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> I don't see the difficulty.  Can you explain why you think it's more
> than a few lines of code needed to produce the tags for accessors and
> predicates "out of thin air", given just the name of the defstruct,
> immediately after we produce the tag for the defstruct itself?

Upon encountering cl-defstruct foo, you'll need to collect the list of 
its slots, and create a tag for a function named foo-slotname for each.

Is there a sexp parser in etags already?

Also handle constructors, but those could be taken care of with a 
regexp, I think, without a lot of false positives.

> If we decide that's what we want, then why won't we write that?  The
> number of constructs that need to be handled might be large, but it's
> finite.

Maybe because it's not really finite. Anyone can define a new construct 
like this, with different syntax.