Hello, I am working with the following specification in some scripts for the semantic patch language.
… target = action(...); … This source code search pattern shows that a return value from a function call should be stored somewhere. The concrete call is restricted by a selection of function names. Such an approach is working to some degree when restrictions on function call parameters can be omitted. But a safer source code analysis requires to distinguish these parameters in more detail. 1. How should be ensured that a specific option was not passed? 2. The parameter number becomes also relevant then. How should functions be split based on their signature? Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
