On Sat, 5 Sep 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > The clarification will be continued when you provide a small semantic
> > patch and a C file that causes a problem.
>
> I imagine that a patch review was still running.
>
>
> > I'm not going to hunt in years
>
> This action is not needed here.
>
>
>
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > The clarification will be continued when you provide a small semantic
> > patch and a C file that causes a problem.
>
> I imagine that a patch review was still running.
>
>
> > I'm not going to hunt in years
>
> This action is not needed here.
>
>
>
On Sat, 5 Sep 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >>> What clarifications?
> >>
> >> Did you notice that my suggestion for the SmPL script variant
> >> “scripts/coccinelle/api/device_attr_show.cocci”
> >> can generate a patch?
> >> https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/0a9015b6-9037-59c5-31f2-cd2b32c86...@li
On Mon, 17 Aug 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > What clarifications?
>
> Did you notice that my suggestion for the SmPL script variant
> “scripts/coccinelle/api/device_attr_show.cocci”
> can generate a patch?
> https://lore.kernel.org/cocci/0a9015b6-9037-59c5-31f2-cd2b32c86...@linux.com/
>
> Unf
On Mon, 17 Aug 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> >> Can missing source code matches trigger the consequence that questionable
> >> branches would be applied there?
> >
> > No.
>
> I imagine that corresponding views will need further clarifications.
What clarifications? In the failing_andany exampl
> The problem has nothing to do with disjunctions.
Can missing source code matches trigger the consequence that questionable
branches would be applied there?
Will the clarification for the issue “failing tests - TODO” be continued?
Regards,
Markus
___
On Mon, 17 Aug 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > The problem has nothing to do with disjunctions.
>
> Can missing source code matches trigger the consequence that questionable
> branches would be applied there?
No. The problem causes transformations that should be applied not to be
applied.
jul
> I will see if it can be fixed.
How will the issue “failing tests - TODO” evolve further?
https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/commit/f2d7ec9006c89610bd1aab4662fcf100e3e6d469#diff-13ff769079511ec7b5dddef7143b2b93R1
How do the comments there fit to undesirable effects for SmPL disjunctions?
On Mon, 17 Aug 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > I will see if it can be fixed.
>
> How will the issue “failing tests - TODO” evolve further?
> https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/commit/f2d7ec9006c89610bd1aab4662fcf100e3e6d469#diff-13ff769079511ec7b5dddef7143b2b93R1
failing_andany.cocci is
