Re: [gedit-list] resurrecting ctags plugin

["John Pye" <john pye student unsw edu au>]

Hi there,

Frederic Back wrote:
>
> Speaking of ctags and symbol browsers, I also think that ctags
> is not the way to go, simply because it parses files instead of
> text buffers. I recently investigated c/c++ symbol parsers on
> the internet, but couldn't find any that matches my basic
> requirements:
>
>       * Written in c, c++ or in python (so I can bind it to the plugin)
>       * Compiles without hassle (no exotic dependencies)
>       * Can be fed buffers, not files.
>
As far as I can see the CodeLite stuff you mentioned actually depends on
ctags.

I wonder if it might be worth looking at OpenGrok. It seems to have a
nice architecture and supports quite a few languages already. But one
would need to work on building it with GCJ or something like that. I
would say that modifying it to work with buffers might not be too hard.
But not easy either...

http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/opengrok/

Cheers
JP

-- 
John Pye
Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering
University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
john.pye AT student DOT unsw.edu.au