RE: [PATCH v3] provide rule for finding refcounters

2017-08-29 Thread Reshetova, Elena
> On Tue, 29 Aug 2017, Reshetova, Elena wrote: > > > Hi, I am very sorry for the delayed reply. Finally unrigging my inbox :( > > > > > A few more small issues: > > > > > > When you deleted the disjunction, you kept the surrounding parentheses. > > > you can drop them (lines 83 and 85). > > > > >

RE: [PATCH v3] provide rule for finding refcounters

2017-08-29 Thread Julia Lawall
On Tue, 29 Aug 2017, Reshetova, Elena wrote: > Hi, I am very sorry for the delayed reply. Finally unrigging my inbox :( > > > A few more small issues: > > > > When you deleted the disjunction, you kept the surrounding parentheses. > > you can drop them (lines 83 and 85). > > > > I guess that the

RE: [PATCH v3] provide rule for finding refcounters

2017-08-29 Thread Reshetova, Elena
Hi, I am very sorry for the delayed reply. Finally unrigging my inbox :( > A few more small issues: > > When you deleted the disjunction, you kept the surrounding parentheses. > you can drop them (lines 83 and 85). > > I guess that the "del" regular expression is supposed to be matching > delete

Re: [PATCH v3] provide rule for finding refcounters

2017-08-16 Thread Julia Lawall
A few more small issues: When you deleted the disjunction, you kept the surrounding parentheses. you can drop them (lines 83 and 85). I guess that the "del" regular expression is supposed to be matching delete. But it also matches delayed, eg net/batman-adv/bridge_loop_avoidance.c:1495:8-27: at