On Wed, 2 Feb 2011, SF Markus Elfring wrote: > > OK, you can print the name if you like. > > Have we got another bit of consensus? > > Can a function body be found by a SmPL pattern without use of a meta-variable > which would identify the enclosing function?
Normally, a call to a function that might fail only occurs in a function body. So I'm not sure what the issue is. The only way to access the name of the enclosing function at the SmPL level is to match the function header. > > But if you make a transformation you get a patch, and the patch usually has > > the name of the affected > > function in it. > > I would prefer to be precise here. - I hope that you mean primarily that the > function where the error handling is incomplete is "affected". A patch normally contains the name of the enclosing function on the line with the line number information. julia _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] http://lists.diku.dk/mailman/listinfo/cocci (Web access from inside DIKUs LAN only)
