[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180713102103.GA12972@himanshu-Vostro-3559>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2018 15:51:03 +0530
From: Himanshu Jha <himanshujha199640@...il.com>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc: Dominique Martinet <asmadeus@...ewreck.org>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@...kovi.net>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@...g.fr>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ville Syrjälä
<ville.syrjala@...ux.intel.com>, yamada.masahiro@...ionext.com,
cocci@...teme.lip6.fr
Subject: Re: [Cocci] [PATCH 01/18] coccinelle: change strncpy+truncation to
strlcpy
> Thanks Himanshu for the suggestions.
>
> However, I'm not sure to follow the discussion. The original problem was
> that Coccinelle was removing a comment that should be preserved. I think
> that this occurs because the line just below the comment is completely
> removed. Coccinelle considers that the comment belongs with that line and
> if the line is removed the comment won't make much sense.
>
> In Himanshu's solution, the code is just not transformed at all, so as a
> side effect the comment stays too. Is that what is wanted in this case?
Yes, there is no transformation with my solution which I advised to
prevent comment removal(which i thought was useful).
My rule is more narrower approach than the regular ones which used
"expression" metavariable.
Rest upto Dominique to choose whatever suits better :)
--
Himanshu Jha
Undergraduate Student
Department of Electronics & Communication
Guru Tegh Bahadur Institute of Technology
Powered by blists - more mailing lists