> I don't think so as any type or combination of
> arithmetic operations would then need to be specified
> by the spatch input script.

I imagine that it will be occasionally useful to be more specific in
such semantic patterns.

@pointer_arithmetic@
identifier var, member, add;
int num1, num2;
@@
- *(var->member + add / num1 + num2)
+ var->member[add / num1 + num2]


> I think a precedence specification capability like first
> pointer match followed by longest arithmetic match would
> perhaps be a better generic facility.
>

I find it also nice when a semantic pattern could be written in a very
generic way. But I see that there are some technical challenges so that
false positives can be excluded.

Regards,
Markus
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci

Reply via email to