On Fri, 19 Apr 2024, Markus Elfring wrote: > >> Most of the people prefer: > >> > >> return ret < 0 ? ret: 0; > >> > >> than: > >> > >> return min(ret, 0); > >> > >> Let's tweak the cocci file to ignore those lines completely. > … > > Applied, thanks. (Coccinelle for-6.10 branch). > > Was a planned code adjustment published? There is no "planned code adjustment" if there is no patch. I can check the dependencies again. julia > > > … > >> +++ b/scripts/coccinelle/misc/minmax.cocci > >> @@ -50,11 +50,26 @@ func(...) > >> ...> > >> } > >> > >> +// Ignore errcode returns. > >> +@errcode@ > … > >> -// Don't generate patches for errcode returns. > >> -@errcode depends on patch@ > … > > How does such a change fit to the usability of the coccicheck operation modes > “context” and “org”? > > Should dependencies be reconsidered any more for the desired consistency > of involved rules for scripts of the semantic patch language? > > Regards, > Markus >
