> > How do you think about the possibility for any adjustments according to the > > order > > of the mentioned function names in proposed disjunctions for the semantic > > patch language? > > Please think about this for 5 seconds. Maybe there are 2000 calls to > these allocation functions, and maybe there are a million function calls > in the files that contain these calls.
Would you become interested to check the usage statistics in more detail? > Microscopically optimizing the treatment of 2000 calls is not going to do > anything > to help the overall runtime, which depends on matching all > of the above function names against the one million overall calls. I got an other software understanding for the evaluation characteristics of discussed SmPL scripts. > > Can any additional identifiers become relevant? > > If you have other names to suggest, please do. If you don't have other > names to suggest, then please stop asking such rhetorical questions. I suggest to look at further possibilities so that more function call combinations can be checked automatically. How do you think about approaches to determine relevant properties in systematic ways (besides listing involved identifiers explicitly)? Regards, Markus _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list [email protected] https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
