On Tue, 2015-02-17 at 07:56AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> Another patch is below. With this the code parses, and the transformation
> can be made. However, it considers this to be a duplicate const
> annotation, so I'm not sure that the const is being associated in the
> right way by the parser.
I applied the patch. I do see the mentioned warning now:
Warning: PARSING: duplicate 'const'; value = [1]
The replacement still doesn't happen though. I'm not sure whether I
need another rule to catch these declarations. But I think I will
just make people fix their code. I think having 'const' appear twice
is not right, despite it being parseable.
Sören
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
