On Sun, 17 Feb 2019, Markus Elfring wrote: > >> Would you dare to interpret my update suggestion (reordering of two identifiers) > >> as a required SmPL script correction? > > > > I didn't suggest to reorder anything. > > This is obvious according to your acknowledgement for the sixth version > of this evolving SmPL script. > > > > Both are needed. > > If you would insist on the specification of such an assignment exclusion > for a SmPL ellipsis: > Can we agree on a correct order? I don't get your point. There is no correct order. Each order expresses something different. The order that is currently in the semantic patch is the one that is more likely in practice. julia > > > > And, no I don't consider it to be a required suggestion. > > Have we got a different view about an implementation detail at this place? > > > > In practice, reassigning such a variable is very unlikely. > > This can be. > > Regards, > Markus >
