Bug#672484: How does it compare to gedit-source-code-browser-plugin ?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Am 12.07.2012 20:28, schrieb Pietro Battiston:
> Hello,
>
> I'm the maintainer of gedit-source-code-browser-plugin, which does
> in principle more or less the same thing (ctags-based too).
>
> When I decided to (use and) package it, I first looked at the
> possible alternatives, and I preferred it to gedit-classbrowser,
> which I had also tried. Honestly, I don't remember why.
>
> I clearly do not mean that you shouldn't package
> gedit-classbrowser3g, but I'd be curious of knowing what features
> it has which gedit-source-code-browser-plugin lacks.
>
> bye
>
> Pietro
>
>
>
>
gedit-classbrowser3g comes with additional parsers, so it supports
more languages than ctags (XML, HTML, diff, Markdown). The ctags
output format has some limitations for languages with nested
definitions like Python. The gedit-source-code-browser-plugin can't
show e.g. the relationship of function definitions inside functions.
For gedit-classbrowser3g an Python parser was written, that further
can show imports and instance attributes.
An other difference is how the tags are sorted. The
gedit-source-code-browser-plugin groups them by type (Classes,
Variables, Members, Functions, …), gedit-classbrowser3g shows the tags
in the order as they occur in the source.
gedit-classbrowser3g provides menuitems to jump to next/previous tag
and has a context menu in the sidepane.
When the cursor moves in the editor, the tag is automatically selected
in the sidepane and the subtree expanded.
Regards, B.C.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=+5m4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: