| From: | Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> | 
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> | 
| Cc: | alvherre(at)alvh(dot)no-ip(dot)org, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org | 
| Subject: | Re: make_ctags: use -I option to ignore pg_node_attr macro | 
| Date: | 2022-10-19 09:55:47 | 
| Message-ID: | 20221019185547.b5f800e6a7520d21173c8fb2@sraoss.co.jp | 
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email | 
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers | 
On Wed, 19 Oct 2022 18:11:13 +0900 (JST)
Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp> wrote:
> > By the way, after executing both make_etags and make_ctags, trying tag jump
> > in my vim causes the following error even though there are correct tags files.
> > 
> >  E431: Format error in tags file "backend/access/heap/TAGS"
> > 
> > Removing all TAGS files as below can resolve this error.
> >  $ find . -name TAGS | xargs rm
> > 
> > So, should we have one more option of make_{ce}tags script to clean up
> > existing tags/TAGS files?
> 
> Not sure. Before the commit make_ctags did not do such a thing but we
> never heard any complain like yours. Also I believe vi/vim users never
> invoke make_etags (same thing can be said to emacs users). So why
> should we bother?
Indeed, it was my first use of make_etags (or make_ctags -e) and it was
just for testing the patch. Similarly, someone who runs mistakenly this
command might want this option. However, as you say, there've been no
complain about this, so I don't feel it necessary so much. Maybe, users
of this command would be able to remove tags by their selves easily.
Regards,
Yugo Nagata
-- 
Yugo NAGATA <nagata(at)sraoss(dot)co(dot)jp>
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | vignesh C | 2022-10-19 10:36:51 | Improve tab completion for ALTER STATISTICS | 
| Previous Message | Bharath Rupireddy | 2022-10-19 09:40:06 | Re: Move backup-related code to xlogbackup.c/.h |