From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.2 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 32B49C63777 for ; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 19:00:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from isis.lip6.fr (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 389BE20771 for ; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 19:00:36 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 389BE20771 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=inria.fr Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr Received: from systeme.lip6.fr (systeme.lip6.fr [132.227.104.7]) by isis.lip6.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0ASJ0D5F027838; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 20:00:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from systeme.lip6.fr (systeme.lip6.fr [127.0.0.1]) by systeme.lip6.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F3735C34; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 20:00:13 +0100 (CET) Received: from isis.lip6.fr (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by systeme.lip6.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9021C454B for ; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 20:00:11 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr (mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.83]) by isis.lip6.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 0ASJ09TI020285 for ; Sat, 28 Nov 2020 20:00:09 +0100 (CET) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.78,378,1599516000"; d="scan'208";a="480014389" Received: from 173.121.68.85.rev.sfr.net (HELO hadrien) ([85.68.121.173]) by mail2-relais-roc.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 28 Nov 2020 20:00:09 +0100 Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2020 20:00:09 +0100 (CET) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: Markus Elfring In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <13b38013-8d4f-55fa-3c0e-ead782031659@web.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (DEB 394 2020-01-19) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, Sender e-mail whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]); Sat, 28 Nov 2020 20:00:14 +0100 (CET) X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]); Sat, 28 Nov 2020 20:00:09 +0100 (CET) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 132.227.60.2 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 132.227.60.2 Cc: Coccinelle Subject: Re: [Cocci] Checking the influence of an omitted semicolon on a code adjustment X-BeenThere: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr Errors-To: cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr On Sat, 28 Nov 2020, Markus Elfring wrote: > > Why do you want to remove the semicolon? > > I have shown a transformation example where a function parameter should be replaced > by a previous function call. > Thus a semicolon should be intentionally be deleted. That makes no sense. You can't have an expression directly following a statement. Only statements follow other statements. julia > > > > If you want to find the call somewhere in the next statement, you can say > > > > ( > > S > > & > > call( > > ... > > ) > > ) > > > > where S is a statement metavariable. > > This SmPL specification variant can be also interesting. > > I got just interested in the possibility to omit an extra semicolon > in my simple change approach. > > Regards, > Markus > _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci