Skip to content

Remove many false positives from the ctags results #11072

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 19, 2013

Conversation

chris-morgan
Copy link
Member

Anchoring the keyword as the first non-whitespace on a line may mean
that the occasional genuine-but-unconventionally-formatted tag is
missed, but it avoids a large number of false positives.

I changed the type descriptive texts about a bit too. That part's purely
cosmetic.

I also changed the ignored file list to use a filename matching the make
rule, TAGS.vi instead of TAGS.vim.

Anchoring the keyword as the first non-whitespace on a line may mean
that the occasional genuine-but-unconventionally-formatted tag is
missed, but it avoids a large number of false positives.

I changed the type descriptive texts about a bit too. That part's purely
cosmetic.

I also changed the ignored file list to use a filename matching the make
rule, `TAGS.vi` instead of `TAGS.vim`.
@ezyang
Copy link
Contributor

ezyang commented Dec 19, 2013

r+

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 19, 2013
Anchoring the keyword as the first non-whitespace on a line may mean
that the occasional genuine-but-unconventionally-formatted tag is
missed, but it avoids a large number of false positives.

I changed the type descriptive texts about a bit too. That part's purely
cosmetic.

I also changed the ignored file list to use a filename matching the make
rule, `TAGS.vi` instead of `TAGS.vim`.
@bors bors closed this Dec 19, 2013
@bors bors merged commit a1ca745 into rust-lang:master Dec 19, 2013
chris-morgan added a commit to chris-morgan/rust that referenced this pull request Dec 19, 2013
There, concrete evidence that I shouldn't try doing such things at 1:30am.
bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2013
(#11072)

There, concrete evidence that I shouldn't try doing such things at 1:30am.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants