> I don't think there is anything to be more explicit about. Do you find the documentation complete for this functionality at the moment?
> I don't foresee any change in the regular expression syntax, I imagine a need for advanced configuration possibilities around “regexp” engines. > and I don't forsee any change in the constraint script syntax. Is the current approach the official one already? > Perhaps the constraint scrpt syntax could be generalized to allow more > in practice than function calls. Which software development concerns can hinder progress in the way I imagine so far? > That might happen some day, but it is an extremely low priority. I am curious if the involved dependencies can be clarified further. >> Have we got just different views about the relevance of curly brackets around >> the specification of a function name (instead of a complete function body)? > > No idea what this means. What curly braces? What function name? I find this kind of feedback strange. I hope that communication difficulties can be resolved better around the provided test case, can't it? https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/cbc751b30d9e02390d60ebed643c8e4a3fa0bb2b/tests/idcon_ocaml.cocci Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
