On Tue, 17 Feb 2015, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> 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.
Could you send a complete example? It worked in the example I tried.
julia
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
