On Thu, 12 May 2016, Sören Brinkmann wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-05-12 at 09:06:45 +0200, Julia Lawall wrote:
> > > > @removal@
> > > > identifier F, I;
> > > > type T;
> > > > @@
> > > > F(...,
> > > > - const
> > > > T I,
> > > > ...
> > > > );
> >
> > Oops, now I see why this doesn't parse. When you make a rule for a
> > prototype, you need to specify the return type (which could be just T1).
> > Otherwise, the parser can't tell the difference between this and a
> > function call.
>
> You're right that does it. Looks to me then that the grammar
> documentation should not indicate the fn_ctype as optional for function
> prototypes (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/docs/main_grammar006.html)?
Indeed. I'll fix that. Thanks!
julia
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
