On 03/27/2012 11:14 AM, Julia Lawall wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Mar 2012, Michael Stefaniuc wrote:
>
>> On 03/27/2012 12:07 AM, Cyril Roelandt wrote:
>>> On 03/26/12 23:56, ron minnich wrote:
>>>> @@
>>>> identifier f;
>>>> type T;
>>>> identifer e;
>>>> @@
>>>> T f(...){<...
>>>> -e = i2c_add_adapter(...);
>>>> ...>}
>>>
>>> You wrote "identifer" instead of "identifier" :)
>> Julia, shouldn't spatch --parse-cocci complain about that?
>
> The parser considers it to be a typedef.
>
> This seems to be a pretty common mistake. Perhaps it should generate a
> warning for this specific misspelling.
Did that change recently? Because I'm used to write the typedef
explicitly, e.g. in this case I would write it as:
typedef identifer;
identifer e;
bye
michael
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.diku.dk/mailman/listinfo/cocci
(Web access from inside DIKUs LAN only)
