Re: Coccinelle: zalloc-simple: Checking consequences from the usage of at signs in Python strings
> So it works, but you are complaining anyway? How serious do you interpret such information in the SmPL manual? >> https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/bf1c6a5869dd324f5faeeaa3a12d57270e478b21/docs/manual/cocci_syntax.tex#L50 >> >> “… >> Furthermore, @ should not be used in this code. … >> …” > > I guess the conclusion is that it woks in strings (which are pretty > universal) and not in comments (which are language specific). Would you like to achieve any safer data processing for potentially “reserved” characters? Regards, Markus
Re: Coccinelle: zalloc-simple: Checking consequences from the usage of at signs in Python strings
> So it works, but you are complaining anyway? How serious do you interpret such information in the SmPL manual? >> https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/bf1c6a5869dd324f5faeeaa3a12d57270e478b21/docs/manual/cocci_syntax.tex#L50 >> >> “… >> Furthermore, @ should not be used in this code. … >> …” > > I guess the conclusion is that it woks in strings (which are pretty > universal) and not in comments (which are language specific). Would you like to achieve any safer data processing for potentially “reserved” characters? Regards, Markus
Re: Coccinelle: zalloc-simple: Checking consequences from the usage of at signs in Python strings
> So it works, but you are complaining anyway? I dare to point a contradiction out between two information sources once more. Is this SmPL script really working in intended way already? > I guess the conclusion is that it woks in strings (which are pretty > universal) and not in comments (which are language specific). Does the documentation need another update for the Coccinelle software to achieve the desired correctness? Which software design direction will get priority in such an use case? Regards, Markus
Re: Coccinelle: zalloc-simple: Checking consequences from the usage of at signs in Python strings
> So it works, but you are complaining anyway? I dare to point a contradiction out between two information sources once more. Is this SmPL script really working in intended way already? > I guess the conclusion is that it woks in strings (which are pretty > universal) and not in comments (which are language specific). Does the documentation need another update for the Coccinelle software to achieve the desired correctness? Which software design direction will get priority in such an use case? Regards, Markus
Re: Coccinelle: zalloc-simple: Checking consequences from the usage of at signs in Python strings
On Fri, 19 Jan 2018, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > I removed the blank line at EOF, > > then applied to linux-kbuild/misc. > > This script for the semantic patch language is using the at sign within string > literals for Python code. > > It is nice when this character seems to work also with the current software. So it works, but you are complaining anyway? > How does its usage fit to the following information in the SmPL manual? > > https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/bf1c6a5869dd324f5faeeaa3a12d57270e478b21/docs/manual/cocci_syntax.tex#L50 > > “… > Furthermore, @ should not be used in this code. > Spatch scans the script code for the next @ and considers that to be the > beginning of the next rule, even if @ occurs within e.g., a comment. > …” I guess the conclusion is that it woks in strings (which are pretty universal) and not in comments (which are language specific). julia > > See also: > Configuration or escaping of @ characters for embedded programming language > scripts > https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/issues/36 > > Regards, > Markus > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
Re: Coccinelle: zalloc-simple: Checking consequences from the usage of at signs in Python strings
On Fri, 19 Jan 2018, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > I removed the blank line at EOF, > > then applied to linux-kbuild/misc. > > This script for the semantic patch language is using the at sign within string > literals for Python code. > > It is nice when this character seems to work also with the current software. So it works, but you are complaining anyway? > How does its usage fit to the following information in the SmPL manual? > > https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/bf1c6a5869dd324f5faeeaa3a12d57270e478b21/docs/manual/cocci_syntax.tex#L50 > > “… > Furthermore, @ should not be used in this code. > Spatch scans the script code for the next @ and considers that to be the > beginning of the next rule, even if @ occurs within e.g., a comment. > …” I guess the conclusion is that it woks in strings (which are pretty universal) and not in comments (which are language specific). julia > > See also: > Configuration or escaping of @ characters for embedded programming language > scripts > https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/issues/36 > > Regards, > Markus > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-janitors" in > the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >
Re: Coccinelle: zalloc-simple: Checking consequences from the usage of at signs in Python strings
> I removed the blank line at EOF, > then applied to linux-kbuild/misc. This script for the semantic patch language is using the at sign within string literals for Python code. It is nice when this character seems to work also with the current software. How does its usage fit to the following information in the SmPL manual? https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/bf1c6a5869dd324f5faeeaa3a12d57270e478b21/docs/manual/cocci_syntax.tex#L50 “… Furthermore, @ should not be used in this code. Spatch scans the script code for the next @ and considers that to be the beginning of the next rule, even if @ occurs within e.g., a comment. …” See also: Configuration or escaping of @ characters for embedded programming language scripts https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/issues/36 Regards, Markus
Re: Coccinelle: zalloc-simple: Checking consequences from the usage of at signs in Python strings
> I removed the blank line at EOF, > then applied to linux-kbuild/misc. This script for the semantic patch language is using the at sign within string literals for Python code. It is nice when this character seems to work also with the current software. How does its usage fit to the following information in the SmPL manual? https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/bf1c6a5869dd324f5faeeaa3a12d57270e478b21/docs/manual/cocci_syntax.tex#L50 “… Furthermore, @ should not be used in this code. Spatch scans the script code for the next @ and considers that to be the beginning of the next rule, even if @ occurs within e.g., a comment. …” See also: Configuration or escaping of @ characters for embedded programming language scripts https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/issues/36 Regards, Markus
