Eric M. Ludlam wrote:
>>>> Markus Gritsch <gritsch@...> seems to think that:
>> klaus.berndl@... wrote:
> [ ... ]
>>> IMHO ebrowse has a very clumsy user-interaction and integrates not
>>> really smart within emacs-working...but of course a matter ot
>> I am not going over this again, I already agreed on that. However,
>> I am not seeing ebrowse as a foe which must be eliminated, just to
>> use CEDET features alone. I was also trying to get CEDET working
>> for me to jump to tag definitions/declarations, but didn't succeed.
> [ ... ]
> I think it would be quite handy to allow CEDET/Semantic to use other
> types of databases (cscope, ebrowse, TAGS, JDEE Beanshell, gdb symbol
> lookup, objdump, nm, etc) as semanticdb back ends for finding a tag by
> Any of these alternate C databases could be used to search by name,
> name-regexp, or completion which is what is usually needed for
> various completion engines. Such a feature would allow semantic
> based tools to access a full database of tags without having to parse
> them all. That would be exceptionally useful and friendly.
> My original language agnostic smart summary/completion tool used TAGS
> as the back end, and a really nasty parser to do the intermediate
> work. That nasty parser is what pretty much forced me to sit down and
> write a parser generator.
> User interfaces are a matter of taste. Programming APIs for writing
> user interfaces should be as clean as possible. (Something I'm not
> always good at.) As for final implementation, I don't care where the
> tags come from as long as it can be made as fast and accurate as
> possible, and those tags contain everything necessary to make a
> decision (automated, or otherwise.)
> Does XEmacs have ebrowse as an option?
AFAIK ebrowse is written by Gerd Moellmann who was (is) a maintainer
of GNU Emacs... no XEmacs-version of ebrowse available - and i do not
know how hard or easy it wuld be to port ebrowse to XEmacs...