>> @display@
>> expression x;
>> identifier f;
>
> You can put f != {likely,unlikely} here.I would appreciate to achieve a better understanding how these likeliness annotations can influence the shown source code search approach. > Maybe there will be some false positives when x->f is in a condition > that previously checked that x is not NULL. Such information can become more interesting. > Does this happen a lot? My view is incomplete. > If the answer to either question is no, does the problem really matter? > If it does really matter, I hope that the probability for false positives (because of evolving source code searches) can be considerably reduced. > then it is possible to solve it, by adding a previous rule that > marks such safe dereferences with a position variable. But I don't know > whether it is worth it. I am curious how corresponding software development efforts will evolve. Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
