Am 12.02.2018 um 22:04 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> writes:
> 
>> I thought it may be a helpful
>> for merging this series with the rest of the evolved code base which
>> may make use of one of the converted functions. So instead of fixing
>> that new instance manually, cocinelle could do that instead.
> 
> Having the .cocci used for the conversion *somewhere* would indeed
> be helpful, as it allows me to (1) try reproducing this patch by
> somebody else using the file and following the steps in order to
> audit this patch and (2) catch new places that need to be migrated
> in in-flight topics.
> 
> But placing it in contrib/coccinelle/ has other side effects.

Running "make coccicheck" takes longer.  What other downsides are
there?

> I can think of two precedents in this project, namely:
> 
>   - fixup-builtins in 36e5e70e ("Start deprecating "git-command" in
>     favor of "git command"", 2007-06-30)
> 
>   - convert-cache in d98b46f8 ("Do SHA1 hash _before_ compression.",
>     2005-04-20)
> 
> that are about tools that is useful during a transition period but
> can and should be removed after transition is over.  These two were
> done as one-off and added at the top-level, but perhaps we want a
> new directory at the top (e.g. devtools/) to add things like this
> and hold them while they are relevant?

Semantic patches for completed transformations can be removed as
well (or archived, e.g. by renaming to .cocci.done or so).

René

Reply via email to