Re: Generalizing find-definition

[Dmitry Gutov]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

>> The only single string that reliably would allow to find the correct
>> definition would be "foo.Foo.baz", but I do not think that anyone
>> would consider that to be "the identifier at point" here.
>
> I would.

I think it should return "baz" here, if we want to go this way at all.
And then that value could be passed to a "search-definition-function",
which will perform a full non-precise scan.

It apparent that we won't be able to do precise searches for identifiers
in most cases, so having a separate variable and function for this seems
to be the way to go, considering that the implementations are likely to
be fairly different anyway.