Re: [cocci] Checking evaluation of another SmPL script

On Sun, 24 May 2026, Markus Elfring wrote:

> >> Function sizes probably influence hunk generation.
> >> Will such case distinctions become more interesting?
> >
> > If you want me to comment on something, you have to include both the
> > semantic patch and the C code.
>
> The corresponding data should be available also by known mailing list archive interfaces,
> shouldn't they?
>
>
> >                                 I can't guess whether you have used again
> > the C code that you provided in a previous email (where obtaining a single
> > huk seemed fine).
>
> This is the case for the discussion at the moment.
>
>
> >                    Please also provide precise information about the
> > result you expect.
> We are trying to clarify different expectations for SmPL data processing
> with goto statements.

Please actually clarify your expectations.  Don't just say that you didn't
get what you expected.  Also say what you expected to get.  I can't guess
what that is.

Please send one single mail with the semantic patch, the C file, and a
precise description of what you find unsatisfactory about the result, ie
what specific line should have been marked in a way that is different than
the way it currently is.

julia