>>> @@ >>> type T; >>> T x; >> >> Would the specification "type x" be also sufficient? > > Not at all. That would make x be a type. You want it to be an > expression, of some type.
It seems that I do not understand this distinction at the moment. I would interpret this part more in the way that a SmPL metavariable is simply renamed from "T" to "x". >>> identifier f; >>> void v; >>> @@ >>> >>> ( >>> f(...)@v; >>> | >>> *f(...)@x; >>> ) >> >> Does the first pattern take precedence over the last one > > Yes, always. Thanks for your clarification. I am still unfamiliar with the consequences from the use of variables like "v" and "x" when they are not position variables as you suggest in your example script. Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
