[Cocci] Usage of "expressions" and "identifiers" with SmPL

[elfring@users.sourceforge.net (SF Markus Elfring)]

>>> Someone who has to read so much text and in the end has no information
>>> about the question he was asking will not likely get a good impression
>>> about the software he is trying to use.
>>
>> A beginner should usually read some text for the desired learning experience.
>> Can it be that you worry a bit too much about the potential for
>> bad impressions around your software?
> 
> Sorry to be the bringer of bad news, but Julia is spot on.

Thanks for your interesting feedback.

It seems to indicate also special details about your learning approach.


> The only effect your emails had on me was a big "WTF!?".

All of them (including the provided small SmPL script examples on 2016-10-05)?


Do you care for the consequences around the usage of embedded (programming)
languages within the semantic patch language as "a host"?
Can such a distinction be useful also for you?


> Had Julia not responded to my messages at almost the same time,

Here software support is very nice, isn't it?


> I would have left this list and Coccinelle for good.

I wonder that you would really run away so quickly just because
a few alternative description approaches became a bit longer.


>> Would you like to start another marketing project?
> 
> What's the point of all these random questions that you bring up in
> response to every sentence?

Did you inspect any items from the GitHub issue tracker?


> Do you think they are helpful?

I hope so.


>> I find that this mailing list gets only low message traffic so far.
> 
> Do you think others share this impression?

Yes. - I guess so. (I do not know concrete numbers for my view.)


> Do you think this is a good thing or a bad thing?

It might be easier to get started than in other areas you could get
involved in depending on your desire.

I hope that the varying topic mixture is interesting enough as another
valuable information source.


> How do you think will this situation evolve?

I imagine that the Coccinelle software will be improved in various directions.
I hope that the attractiveness of the provided tools will increase accordingly.
Will such an evolution mean more users with a higher message exchange rate
at various places?


>> So I would imagine that most well-intended discussion contributions could
>> be useful. Is the mixture of presented topics reasonable?
> 
> What do you mean with discussion contributions?

Did I (and the other contributors) publish any messages on this mailing list
before that could fit to your way of looking for helpful information already?


> Do you think that asking if the topic is reasonable is equivalent to asking
> if the specific contributions are reasonable?

No. - Would you like to discuss this aspect any further?


>> We came along different views around the usage of "expressions"
>> in previous discussions, didn't we?
> 
> Whom do you mean with "we"?

I guess that it could be primarily interpreted as Julia and me.


> Is it important in this context?

I find the software development history somewhat relevant also in this use case.


>> You repeated the explanation "An expression is something that has a value."
>> which is reasonable to some degree. I would like to know then:
>> Which "value" is provided by the software construct "idexpression"
>> in the semantic patch language?
> 
> Do you think you will be able to find out the answer to this question?

I could get some information from reading OCaml source code in principle.
But I would prefer an other clarification approach.


> How could we best assist you in that?

Which possibilities have you got in mind at the moment?
Are you really interested in improving your "assistance" in significant ways?

Regards,
Markus