> I'm not going to debug anything that involves external tools,
> ie your database.

* Will such a restriction become interesting also for further clarifications?

* Did you notice that the script variant 
“list_duplicate_statement_pairs_from_if_branches5.cocci”
  is working only by a simple combination of SmPL and Python code
  (without an extra dependency on the software “SQLAlchemy”)?
  The desired data should be imported into an ordinary Python dictionary here.


> Note however that by converting from * to printing, you have converted the
> ...s in your searching rule from "exists" to "forall" as the quantifier
> over the paths.

Thanks for this reminder of consequences around the asterisk functionality
and SmPL ellipses.


> You may want to put exists in the header of the searching rule.

I can try this setting also out.

Would you like to clarify the following test result?

elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Linux/next-patched> time spatch 
~/Projekte/Coccinelle/janitor/list_duplicate_statement_pairs_from_if_branches6.cocci
 drivers/media/dvb-frontends/stv0297.c
…
statement1|statement2|"function name"|"source file"|incidence
dprintk ( "%s: readreg error (reg == 0x%02x, ret == %i)\n" , __func__ , reg , 
ret ) ;|return - 1 ;|stv0297_readreg|drivers/media/dvb-frontends/stv0297.c|3
dprintk ( "%s: readreg error (reg == 0x%02x, ret == %i)\n" , __func__ , reg1 , 
ret ) ;|return - 1 ;|stv0297_readregs|drivers/media/dvb-frontends/stv0297.c|3

real    0m0,272s
user    0m0,219s
sys     0m0,052s


Where does the added number come from for the identifier “reg1”?

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

Reply via email to