{"thread":{"id":"52246","subject":"coccinelle: fine-tuning for commit.cocci?","startedAt":"2019-11-12T17:50:39Z","lastAt":"2019-11-12T17:50:39Z","messageCount":1,"participants":["Markus Elfring"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"386025","messageId":"5ff15b03-aa04-f8f7-2989-cc5463e71d27@web.de","threadId":"52246","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"coccinelle: fine-tuning for commit.cocci?","fromName":"Markus Elfring","fromEmail":"markus.elfring@web.de","sentAt":"2019-11-12T17:50:25Z","receivedAt":"2019-11-12T17:50:39Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"markus.elfring@web.de","avatar":null},"body":"Hello,\n\nI would like to comment implementation details from\nthe commit 301b8c7f405d3cd4f32b14bd336ac8c0400d9382 (\"commit.c: add repo_get_commit_tree()\").\n\n\n1. Would you like to use a code variant (for the semantic patch language)\n   which can work without a regular expression for the exclusion of a single item?\n\n   identifier f != set_commit_tree;\n\n\n2. How do you think about the following variants for the specification of SmPL constraints?\n\n   * Advanced regular expression\n\n     identifier f !~ \"^(?:get_commit_tree_in_graph_one|load_tree_for_commit|(?:repo_g|s)et_commit_tree)$\";\n\n   * Item list filter\n\n     identifier f != { get_commit_tree_in_graph_one, load_tree_for_commit, repo_get_commit_tree, set_commit_tree };\n\n\nRegards,\nMarkus\n"}]}