Re: coccinelle: adjustments for array.cocci?
- From
- Markus Elfring <markus.elfring@web.de>
- Date
- Nov 14, 2019, 13:15 UTC
- Message-ID
- <ba5d609a-16ea-d7e9-66e6-19aab94b2acd@web.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqr22b9ptk.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
Show 13 quoted lines
>>> I too recall that seemingly redundant entries were noticed during >>> the review and at least back then removing the seemingly redundant >>> ones caused failures in rewriting. >> >> I am curious if the redundancy can be reconsidered once more. >> >> Do you refer to open issues around source code reformatting >> and pretty-printing together with the Coccinelle software here? > > Sorry, I do not follow. > > If you are asking if I am interested in following bleeding edge > Coccinelle development and use this project as a guinea pig to do so,
I did not ask this.
You mentioned “failures”. - I became curious then if corresponding software development challenges can be clarified a bit more.
> then the answer is no.
Such feedback is reasonable.
> I'd rather see us instead staying on the trailing edge ;-) > to make sure that we use common denominator features that are known > to be available in all widely deployed and perhaps a bit dated versions > that come with popular distros.
I find that I am proposing script adjustments within the basic feature set for the semantic patch language here. Further fine-tuning will become possible, won't it?
Regards, Markus