[Cocci] Transformation challenges with SmPL around “LIST_FOR_EACH_ENTRY”
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
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.
More information about the Cocci