On Mon, 13 Jul 2015, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
> > The semantic patch language can also be used to find
> > specific return statements in the source files.
> > How can this software help to find all of them
> > within a function implementation?
> >
> > How are the chances to improve static source code analysis
> > possibilities for such a purpose?
>
> A simple SmPL filter approach like the following works
> already as expected to some degree.
>
> @returns@
> expression express;
> identifier work;
> type return_type;
> @@
> return_type work(...)
> {
> ... when any
> - return express;
The when any's are not needed. ... follows the control flow, so there is
nothing after a return.
> ... when any
> }
>
>
> elfring@Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/Probe> spatch.opt -sp-file
> show_returns1.cocci API-test1.c
> init_defs_builtins: /usr/local/lib/coccinelle/standard.h
> HANDLING: API-test1.c
> diff =
> --- API-test1.c
> +++ /tmp/cocci-output-6241-92ed9e-API-test1.c
> @@ -2,10 +2,8 @@
>
> int my_status(void)
> {
> - return 1;
> }
>
> int main(void)
> {
> - return my_status();
> }
>
>
> I see further software development challenges here.
>
> 1. Do I need to specify a SmPL constraint like "non-void"
> for such a script?
It seems pointless. If the code is returning something and the return
type is void, then the problem is elsewhere.
> 2. The expression which is used for a specific return statement
> can be assigned to a SmPL metavariable in an other script variant.
> I would appreciate if I could process the extracted data
> in a more structured way somehow.
I have no idea what you want to do. You can get the AST if you write a
script using OCaml:
(stringrep,astrep) << r.express;
julia
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
