Re: Adding support for xref jumping to headers/interfaces

[Filipp Gunbin]

On 27/02/2023 16:18 -0800, Yuan Fu wrote:

>> On Feb 27, 2023, at 3:34 PM, Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru> wrote:
>> 
>> On 28/02/2023 01:12, Stephen Leake wrote:
>>> Dmitry Gutov<dgutov@yandex.ru>  writes:
>>>> About the name, though -- does "jump to interfaces" make sense for
>>>> many languages? To my ear, the naming seems specific to OCaml.
>>>> 
>>>> "jump to declaration(s)", perhaps?
>>> In Ada, the term is "specification(s)". I don't know of other languages
>>> that use it, but the English meaning is clear.
>> 
>> That sounds clear enough, but if it's only an Ada term, it might not be the 
>> best choice for other languages. E.g. from completion POV.
>> 
>> This seems like a good occasion for a popular vote. So everyone is welcome 
>> to state their preferred naming.
>> 
>
> I think “interface” is widely used and conveys the meaning well. Java, 
> Clojure and Javascript call them interfaces, too.

In Java it makes more sense to talk about abstract methods, if we're on
the method level.  Interfaces are type-level construct, and they include
not only abstract methods, but also default and static methods (with
implementation), constants etc.

TBH, I don't see how this could be named well to fit all languages.  I
like "declaration" word more, if we need a name.  However, it's
confusable with "definition".