From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@lip6.fr>
Cc: Coccinelle <cocci@systeme.lip6.fr>, "René Scharfe" <l.s.r@web.de>,
"Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Cocci] git-coccinelle: adjustments for array.cocci?
Date: Sat, 16 Nov 2019 19:29:29 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d232b052-430c-5d44-96d5-b8bff261314d@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.21.1911161855400.3558@hadrien>
>> + memcpy(
>> +( ptr, E, n *
>> +- sizeof(*(ptr))
>> ++ sizeof(T)
>> +| arr, E, n *
>> +- sizeof(*(arr))
>> ++ sizeof(T)
>> +| E, ptr, n *
>> +- sizeof(*(ptr))
>> ++ sizeof(T)
>> +| E, arr, n *
>> +- sizeof(*(arr))
>> ++ sizeof(T)
>> )
>> + )
>
> This seems quite unreadable, in contrast to the original code.
The code formatting can vary for improved applications of SmPL disjunctions.
See also related update suggestions:
* https://public-inbox.org/git/05ab1110-2115-7886-f890-9983caabc52c@web.de/
* https://public-inbox.org/git/75b9417b-14a7-c9c6-25eb-f6e05f340376@web.de/
>> 5. I stored another generated patch based on the adjusted SmPL script.
>
> No idea what it means to store a patch.
I put the output from the program “spatch” into a text file like “array-reduced1.diff”
in a selected directory.
>> 6. I performed a corresponding file comparison.
>>
>> --- array-released.diff 2019-11-14 21:29:11.020576916 +0100
>> +++ array-reduced1.diff 2019-11-14 21:45:58.931956527 +0100
>> @@ -6,24 +6,10 @@
>> r->entry_count = t->entry_count;
>> r->delta_depth = t->delta_depth;
>> - memcpy(r->entries,t->entries,t->entry_count*sizeof(t->entries[0]));
>> -+ COPY_ARRAY(r->entries, t->entries, t->entry_count);
>> ++ memcpy(r->entries,t->entries,t->entry_count*sizeof(*(t->entries)));
>> release_tree_content(t);
>> return r;
>> }
>
> I have no idea what is being compared here.
I suggest to take another look at the described steps then.
> The COPY_ARRAY thing looks nice, but doesn't seem to have anything to do
> with your semantic patch.
I find your interpretation of the presented software situation questionable.
* I got the impression in the meantime that my suggestion for a refactoring
of a specific SmPL disjunction influenced transformation results for
a subsequent SmPL rule in unexpected ways.
* Other software adjustments and solution variants can trigger further
development considerations, can't they?
Regards,
Markus
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-11-16 18:29 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-12 15:08 coccinelle: adjustments for array.cocci? Markus Elfring
2019-11-12 18:37 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-13 2:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-11-13 8:49 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-14 2:03 ` Junio C Hamano
2019-11-14 13:15 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-14 16:41 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-14 17:14 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-14 17:46 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-15 11:11 ` git-coccinelle: " Markus Elfring
2019-11-15 14:20 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-15 18:50 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-16 1:00 ` [Cocci] " Julia Lawall
2019-11-16 6:57 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-16 8:29 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-16 17:57 ` Julia Lawall
2019-11-16 18:29 ` Markus Elfring [this message]
2019-11-15 20:37 ` coccinelle: " Markus Elfring
2019-11-16 21:13 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-17 7:56 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-17 13:40 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-17 18:19 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-19 19:14 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-19 20:21 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-21 19:01 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-16 16:33 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-16 21:38 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-17 8:19 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-17 13:40 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-17 18:36 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-19 19:15 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-18 16:10 ` [PATCH] coccinelle: improve array.cocci Markus Elfring
2019-11-19 19:15 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-20 9:01 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-21 19:02 ` René Scharfe
2019-11-21 19:44 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-22 15:29 ` SZEDER Gábor
2019-11-22 16:17 ` Markus Elfring
2019-11-22 5:54 ` [PATCH] " Junio C Hamano
2019-11-22 7:34 ` Markus Elfring
2020-01-25 8:23 ` Markus Elfring
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=d232b052-430c-5d44-96d5-b8bff261314d@web.de \
--to=markus.elfring@web.de \
--cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=julia.lawall@lip6.fr \
--cc=l.s.r@web.de \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).