> A case in parsing_hacks.ml sometimes mislabels as a
> typedef ident.
Can a wording like “as a type definition identifier” be nicer
for this description of a software situation?
Regards,
Markus
___
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
On Sun, 19 Jan 2020, Jaskaran Singh wrote:
> For the following case:
>
>
>
> A case in parsing_hacks.ml sometimes mislabels as a
> typedef ident.
>
> If typedef is a known typedef (such as u8 or *_t), then label
> as a CppMacro. Subsequent cases will then label
> correctly.
OK, I see
For the following case:
A case in parsing_hacks.ml sometimes mislabels as a
typedef ident.
If typedef is a known typedef (such as u8 or *_t), then label
as a CppMacro. Subsequent cases will then label
correctly.
Following are results of --parse-c on the Linux Kernel v5.5-rc4:
Before:
On Sun, 2020-01-19 at 18:48 +0530, Jaskaran Singh wrote:
> For the following case:
>
>
>
> A case in parsing_hacks.ml sometimes mislabels as a
> typedef ident.
>
> If is a known typedef (such as u8 or *_t), then label
> as a CppMacro. Subsequent cases will then label
> correctly.
>
>
For the following case:
A case in parsing_hacks.ml sometimes mislabels as a
typedef ident.
If is a known typedef (such as u8 or *_t), then label
as a CppMacro. Subsequent cases will then label
correctly.
Following is a diff of --parse-c on the Linux Kernel v5.5-rc4:
Before
---
After
nb
