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.
>
> Can such a rejection mean that software development efforts look undesirable
> (while adjustments for the data model would eventually be possible)?
No, it means that it makes no sense and it is not going to happen.
julia
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
