> I don't know why you would even expect this to work. I suggest to take another look at related information sources. https://en.cppreference.com/w/c/language/struct_initialization
> .remove is not a mainingful construct in the C language. I got an other impression from the declaration of a known data structure. https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/v5.4-rc2/source/include/linux/platform_device.h#L188 https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/include/linux/platform_device.h?id=153a971ff578e9c8c5eadc9463c1d73a6adc8693#n190 > It is part of one, but it is not a construct by itself. I am trying to improve source code analysis also around the usage of function pointers. But I have found some interesting information by the following search approach. @find@ identifier action, driver; @@ static struct platform_driver driver = { ..., .remove = action, ... }; @display@ identifier find.action; type T; @@ T action(...) { <+... *kfree(...); ...+> } So I guess that the clarification can become more interesting also for the influence of commas and related SmPL constructs. Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
