On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
On 03/27/2012 11:14 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
On 03/27/2012 12:07 AM, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
On 03/26/12 23:56, ron minnich wrote:
@@
identifier f;
type T;
identifer e;
@@
T f(...){<...
-e = i2c_add_adapter(...);
...>}
You wrote "identifer" instead of "identifier" :)
Julia, shouldn't spatch --parse-cocci complain about that?
The parser considers it to be a typedef.
This seems to be a pretty common mistake. Perhaps it should generate a
warning for this specific misspelling.
Did that change recently? Because I'm used to write the typedef
explicitly, e.g. in this case I would write it as:
typedef identifer;
identifer e;
It's not necessary, and has never been necessary. It is only needed when
the typedef shows up in a cast.
julia
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.diku.dk/mailman/listinfo/cocci
(Web access from inside DIKUs LAN only)
