On Wed, 17 Dec 2014, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > I suggest to reconsider this situation once more. > > I have looked at my script "list_functions_with_single_function_call5.cocci" > again. > > > > * It can be that I got stuck somehow in this application variant as the > > number of relevant rules grew. > > It seems that I made a bit progress in a better direction. > > Now I stumble on the next detail problem if I try to design the needed > SmPL rules for more specific source code. > > * How can it be excluded with the semantic patch language to match non-pointer > data types with the metavariable type "type?" > * Which is the best way to distinguish non-pointer types from pointer data > types > with metavariables? If you do the following: @@ expression * e1; expression e2; @@ ( e1 | e2 ) Then e2 should match the non-pointer type expressions. julia _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
