Ah yes. I see that now. Thanks. Committed as r176493. -----Original Message----- From: Béatrice Creusillet [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 12:19 PM To: Vane, Edwin Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: Patch for LibASTMatchersTutorial.rst (Step 3)
On 03/05/2013 05:46 PM, Vane, Edwin wrote: > Am I missing something in this patch? The matchers you're proposing are > exactly equivalent to the old ones, you're just changing the order in which > the LHS and RHS matchers are listed. The first part of the patch is for readability and consistency with the second part. But in the second part, I inverted the patterns inside the invocations of hasLHS and hasRHS so that the code reflects what is intended (that is, to match i<10 and not 10<i). Béatrice. > Is that right? If so, the order doesn't affect functionality. Is this mean to > be a readability fix? > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Béatrice > Creusillet > Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 11:36 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Patch for LibASTMatchersTutorial.rst (Step 3) > > Hi everybody, > > I propose the attached patch so that the code matches the text. > > Regards, > > Béatrice. > -- Béatrice Creusillet SILKAN - www.silkan.com _______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
