>>> In this case, the problem entirely on your side. You should separate the >>> two top-level declarations into two separate rules, just like any other >>> two top-level declarations you would like to match. >> >> My SmPL script example affects the understanding of the software behaviour >> also around the following information. >> https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/a549b9f0a20e14fe9c36f45990b40dc5708ef8f2/docs/manual/cocci_syntax.tex#L1649 >> >> “… >> All matching done by a SmPL rule is done intraprocedurally. >> …” >> >> >> * How are items represented from the global name space? >> >> * Would the interpretation of the situation be adjusted if a macro call >> and a function implementation would be moved into an other usage context >> like a C++ class (or an enclosing function implementation)? > > I don't understand any of the above.
I find such feedback also interesting somehow. 1. How will we achieve a better common understanding once more in this area? 2. It seems that you prefer so far to refer to “top-level” items instead of thinking with relationships to name spaces. 3. Can you imagine consequences according to nested function implementations? 4. The Coccinelle software contains limitations according to intraprocedural data processing. Under which circumstances will the application of interprocedural source code analysis increase? >>> You also need a >>> >>> declarer name EXPORT_SYMBOL; >>> >>> in the rule that you need to create for matching that part of the code. >> >> Can it become interesting to match a macro call (or a similar >> annotation/attribute) >> also without the declaration of such a metavariable? >> https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/a549b9f0a20e14fe9c36f45990b40dc5708ef8f2/docs/manual/cocci_syntax.tex#L310 > > It has nothing to do with EXPORT_SYMBOL being a macro. The declaration is > needed to tell Coccinelle to look for the thing at top level. Will it become helpful to add such an information also to the SmPL manual? Can the software documentation become clearer another bit also at this place? > Otherwise EXPORT_SYMBOL(...); looks like a function call. Function-like macros are just looking so similar. Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
