On Sun, 7 Dec 2014, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > >> One part of each SmPL disjunction will always not match in this approach > >> if an analysed function implementation has got the return type "void". > >> Would the specification of a metavariable "return_type" be also > >> unnecessary and inappropriate in this use case? > > > > Currently, return_type does absolutely nothing. You can just drop it. > > Should I really omit to distinguish the function return type?
If the return type has no impact on the match, it can be omitted. > When should a filter pattern on function implementations be adapted to > the property that there will be a return value affected (or not)? I don't understand the question. julia _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
