Hi, Le vendredi 17 décembre 2010 à 22:45 +0100, Julia Lawall a écrit : > > OK, it does the trick ! Is there a plan to fix this issue in a more > > straightforward way ? > > Probably not. The code for figuring out where to attach the + code is a > bit subtle. Also, in your case it seems a bit strange to require that the > int declaration comes right before the first statement.
I may have miss something in the provided example which was based on of
your proposal. My only point is to be able to treat independantly of its
position the expression:
Packet p1, p2;
like
Packet p1;
Packet p2;
because the two are syntaxically equivalent.
The transformation I want to do is the following:
- Packet p;
+ Packet *p = EXPRESSION
OTHER DECLARATION
+ if (p == NULL) then exit;
...
+ free(p)
return ...;
> On the other
> hand, the error message could be made more helpful.
It is ok for "me". When I encounter it the first time, I really
understood what was going on.
BR,
--
Eric Leblond <[email protected]>
NuFW, Now User Filtering Works : http://www.nufw.org
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] http://lists.diku.dk/mailman/listinfo/cocci (Web access from inside DIKUs LAN only)
