On Wed, 16 Aug 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > However they can only be bound to the complete sequence of statements in a
> > block. So
> >
> > @@
> > statement list sl;
> > @@
> > if (x) {
> > sl
> > }
> >
> > is ok, but
> >
> > @@
> > statement list sl;
> > @@
> > if (x) {
> > one();
> > sl
> > two();
> > }
> >
> > is not.
>
> How do you think about the usage of a similar SmPL specification?
>
> @display@
> statement list sl;
> @@
> if (...)
> {
> header();
> { // Extra block
> * sl
> }
> footer();
> }
It's fine, A statement list just needs { } around it.
julia
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
