On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 11:11:04AM +0200, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > Note i am in no rush, i just wanted to report this as it is likely a bug > > somewhere > > Thanks for your description of a strange software behaviour. > > How often do you work with the specification “exists” in other SmPL scripts?
I need to review all of them but i think i can remove most of them now that Julia explained that i do not need them if there is no ... between first match and second match in my rules. > > > > moreover i have a work around. > > Is the other transformation approach the solution which is really desired? My work around was to add function with nested block to an extra group on which i run the same semantic patch again to take care of nested block when the original group as two big. This is a minor inconvenience now that i have found why my semantic patch was not modifying nested block (took me a while to converge on the number of files as root of the issue). Cheers, Jérôme _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
