From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: elfring@users.sourceforge.net (SF Markus Elfring) Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2016 08:48:59 +0200 Subject: [Cocci] Usage of "expressions" and "identifiers" with SmPL In-Reply-To: <87zimdz2a5.fsf@vostro.rath.org> References: <87r37vzd8j.fsf@vostro.rath.org> <87shsa7p71.fsf@thinkpad.rath.org> <8760p6ctgw.fsf@thinkpad.rath.org> <878ttzjzss.fsf@vostro.rath.org> <20a829ad-af8d-ee46-8e61-8ba06098c1f5@users.sourceforge.net> <1f88759f-f167-fcea-5c93-b8e13d7a858b@users.sourceforge.net> <4faf71af-49b2-237a-edac-d8841de28cba@users.sourceforge.net> <3bbf1a67-5fae-7d34-d39c-b3820082441d@users.sourceforge.net> <87zimey49q.fsf@vostro.rath.org> <83aae471-2eda-6ae0-9340-8e39bd214542@users.sourceforge.net> <87zimdz2a5.fsf@vostro.rath.org> Message-ID: <0e252439-06c2-7fd1-8701-d6f03433d9aa@users.sourceforge.net> To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr List-Id: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr >>> 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)? > > You wrote three emails on that day. I assume you mean this one? There are further possibilities to improve your learning experience around the replacement of data types and variable names, aren't there? > ,---- > | > 2. ..and how would I go about if instead of the type, I want to replace > | > a variable name? (my_type *ptr --> my_type *pointer). > | > | Would you like to try another small SmPL script out like the following? > | > | > | @name_replacement@ > | @@ > | my_type * > | -ptr > | +pointer > | ; > | > | > | How will your software development experiments evolve for the desired > | application of the semantic patch language? > `---- > > I'm afraid the answer is yes. Interesting ? > Even though the snippet was relevant, Nice. - Thanks for this kind of feedback. > its presentation triggered the same WTF effect. Are you really at the beginning of a learning process where almost every new information can make you upset anyhow? * How would this fit to your academic education? * Did you start reading the Coccinelle manual? >>> 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? > [...] > > Well, I tried to make a point here., but it quite obviously failed utterly. I find that a constructive discussion consists of several questions and some corresponding answers, doesn't it? I am wondering about the learning style that you seem to present here in comparison to some information which was published in your blog. Are there any further challenges to clarify around a term like "mental capacity"? Can any additional techniques or tools help to avoid unwanted communication difficulties so that another software development "fusion" would be achievable? Regards, Markus