> Nothing is officially documented. I find that this feedback acknowledges an interesting open issue for Coccinelle's scripting interfaces.
> But that doesn't mean that no one is using it either. How should software developers build stable tools if they should depend on undocumented details? >> I would prefer to care also for this software aspect. Are there still chances >> to improve the situation for your release candidate or a tool version in the >> near future? > > I have no intention of doing so. I guess that there are still a few design options available for a later reconsideration. I imagine that parameters could be added for the API configuration. > If you want to modify the code and no one else on the list expresses > opposition, > then I guess you can change it. I have got the impression that participation from other mailing list readers was relatively low so far. I would also appreciate more opinions that will be shared here explicitly. > There are certainly efficiency problems in the implementation, but they are > not > in the conversion of strings to integers or vice versa. I would prefer that the observed data type conversion will be only performed on explicit demand. I assume that this implementation detail is in the usual competition with other planned features which have got a higher development priority already. Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] http://lists.diku.dk/mailman/listinfo/cocci (Web access from inside DIKUs LAN only)
