Re: [cocci] Rechecking selected expression list representations

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--8323329-664812956-1780040239=:3655
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT



On Fri, 29 May 2026, Markus Elfring wrote:

> >> I hope that more clarity can be achieved for another technical detail.
> >>
> >> Markus_Elfring@Sonne:…/Projekte/Coccinelle/Probe> /usr/bin/spatch --parse-cocci suggestion6_for_Pierrick_Philippe-20260528.cocci
> >> …
> >> @adjusted_display@
> >> …
> >> (
> >> *memcmp*(&F.X, E1, E2)
> >> |
> >> *memcmp*(E1, &F.X, E2)
> >> )
> >> …
> >>
> >>
> >> Such an information representation seems to be usable somehow.
> >> But is the expression list output really correct for the function call specification
> >> in the mentioned test case?
> >
> > I don't know what is the original semantic patch in this case.
> I find such a feedback strange.
>
> You got relevant data yesterday, didn't you?
> How many messages are still waiting to be forwarded to the mailing list finally?
>
>
> SmPL script repetition for your convenience:
> @adjusted_display@
> expression E1, E2;
> identifier F, X;
> initialiser I;
> type T;
> @@
> *T F = I;
>  ...
> *memcmp(
> (       &F.X, E1
> |       E1, &F.X
> )       , E2
>        )
>
>
> Will responses become more constructive again?

I guess that what is pretty printed is the result of pushing the
disjunction out to the statement level.  At that point you can't see
whether a comma operator is used or whether there is a list of arguments,
because they look the same.  But given the initial code it is the comma
operator.

julia
--8323329-664812956-1780040239=:3655--