On Mon, 15 Mar 2021, Mansour Moufid wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2021, 20:43 Thomas Adam <tho...@xteddy.org> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I can see I was as clear as mud with my explanation -- apologies
> for
> that, so let me try again.
>
> In my original example:
>
> struct monitor {
> struct {
> int width;
> int height
> } virtual;
> };
>
> ... the members width and height aren't required any more, as
> they're
> actually computable generically, and don't belong in that
> struct.
> Instead, I have separate functions which can provide those
> values.
>
> So where I have in code, statements such as:
>
> struct monitor *m = this_monitor();
> int foo = m->virutal.width;
>
> I want to be able to substitute "m->virtual.width" with a
> function
> call "get_width()" -- which does not involve "struct monitor" at
> all.
> Indeed, the semantic patch I'm trying to apply now looks like
> this:
>
> @@
> struct monitor *m;
> @@
>
> - m->virtual.width;
> + get_width();
>
> ... and although spatch doesn't tell me of any errors, when I
> run it
> over my codebase, no modifications are made. So clearly I'm
> still
> doing something wrong.
>
>
> Remove the semi-colons. ;)
Good catch :)
julia_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
