On Fri, 26 Jun 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> I assumed that I may omit the semicolon in such a SmPL code.
> >> Can the specification of a SmPL nest construct ever be sufficient here?
> >
> > No. <+... ...+> matches a subtree of an AST. For a variable
> > initialization, there is no subtree of the AST that includes both the
> > right side of an = and the ;.
>
> Can the abstract syntax tree be adjusted accordingly?
No.
julia
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
