On Sun, 2011-02-20 at 08:43 +0100, ext Julia Lawall wrote: > On Sun, 20 Feb 2011, Oliver McFadden wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I have just installed the latest spatch release hoping this might be a > > bug in my older version, 0.2.3, but I'm now using 0.2.5-rc6, and I have > > the same problem. > > > > The idea was to expand on the "drop unnecessary continue" SmPL > > (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/impact/continue.html) > > > > This works fine on the simple test code (test.c) but when it's applied > > onto a larger code base, it hangs. I've attached the debug output from > > test.c (good.txt) and the debug output from a file in my code base. > > (bad.txt) I have to killed the bad spatch after about 30 seconds. > > Unfortnuately, it is the bad file I would need to see. Perhaps you can > localize the problem with the argument -show_trying, and then make an > example that illustrates the problem?
Yes, I will try this option tonight as soon as I have time and send you the results along with code. > It is possible that it is just very slow. When there are many nested > loops with many nested conditionals, then it is following all of the > control-flow paths, which can take a lot of time. Perhaps in such cases spatch could output a "spinner" showing it's still working and (slowly) making progress (something like the wget progress bar?) > You can use the options > -no_loops and -no_gotos which makes it not follow paths through loops or > gotos. This is not safe in general, but it should be ok for what is to be > done here. Right, but I wouldn't really want to be telling an analysis tool to ignore major features of a language. Seems like a bad idea in my opinion. > > julia _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] http://lists.diku.dk/mailman/listinfo/cocci (Web access from inside DIKUs LAN only)
