[Cocci] Transformation challenges with SmPL around “LIST_FOR_EACH_ENTRY”

Julia Lawall julia.lawall at lip6.fr
Sat Dec 2 11:06:06 CET 2017



On Sat, 2 Dec 2017, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> >> @adjustment@
> >> expression ex;
> >> statement S;
> >> @@
> >> -LIST_FOR_EACH_ENTRY
> >> +hlist_for_each_entry
> >>  (..., ...,
> >> -ex,
> >>  ...)
> >>  S
> >
> > This is not completely a good idea.
>
> I tried to show another approach.
>
>
> > The ... in the argument list will match a sequence of things, not a single thing.
>
> How does this information fit to the specification of the SmPL ellipsis
> as a placeholder for the last macro parameter?

It is just necessary to have the position desire to be changed expressed
unambiguously.

(...
- ex,
  e1)

is also ok.

>
>
> > It could be:
> >
> > -LIST_FOR_EACH_ENTRY
> > +hlist_for_each_entry
> >  (e1,e2,
>
> Are these metavariables required for such an use case?
>
>
> > -ex,
> >  ...)
> >  S
>
> Can such a transformation variant have nicer run time characteristics
> in comparison to the initial SmPL script example?

In practice, I think it would be very unlikely.

julia


> Regards,
> Markus
>


More information about the Cocci mailing list