On Wed, 14 Dec 2011, Derek M Jones wrote:
Josh
@@ struct task_struct *task; @@
- (task)->pid == 0
+ is_idle_task(task)
@@ struct task_struct *task; @@
- (task)->pid != 0
+ !is_idle_task(task)
You could write:
@@ struct task_struct *task; @@
- (task)->pid != 0
+ !((task)->pid == 0)
and rely on the transformed code matching the first rule.
Now of course you have an extra set of ()
On the other hand there might be a 'standard' rule that
promptly write !( == ) back to !=, have not checked.
No isomorphisms are applied to generated code.
julia
It seems like some way should exist to only write one of those and have
coccinelle derive the other one, but I didn't manage to find it. I'd
like to avoid the redundancy if possible; any suggestions?
- Josh Triplett
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.diku.dk/mailman/listinfo/cocci
(Web access from inside DIKUs LAN only)
--
Derek M. Jones tel: +44 (0) 1252 520 667
Knowledge Software Ltd blog:shape-of-code.coding-guidelines.com
Source code analysis http://www.knosof.co.uk
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.diku.dk/mailman/listinfo/cocci
(Web access from inside DIKUs LAN only)
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.diku.dk/mailman/listinfo/cocci
(Web access from inside DIKUs LAN only)
