From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: wagi@monom.org (Daniel Wagner)
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2013 08:55:06 +0200
Subject: [Cocci] gboolean -> bool conversion
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1307111451080.2253@hadrien>
References: <51DE6A05.9050008@monom.org>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1307111026390.2253@hadrien> <51DE75BF.3060207@monom.org>
 <51DE81CC.3010805@monom.org> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1307111221320.2253@hadrien>
 <51DE944F.1000903@monom.org> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1307111417120.2253@hadrien>
 <51DEA75C.10309@monom.org> <alpine.DEB.2.02.1307111451080.2253@hadrien>
Message-ID: <51DFA84A.4050805@monom.org>
To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
List-Id: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr

Hi Julia,

On 07/11/2013 03:07 PM, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> I am pondering if it would be possible to say
>>
>> - gboolean
>> 	when != 'static gboolean func(gpointer)'
>> + bool
>
> No, this is not possible.  Is the idea that you don't want to change the
> return type of a static function?  Then you can record the position of the
> gbooleans that you don't want to change, and only change the others.

It is so obvious when you explain it. Thanks a lot.

> An example is as follows:
>
> @keep@
> identifier f;
> position p;
> typedef	gpointer;
> identifier i;
> @@
>
> static gboolean at p f(gpointer i)	{ ... }
>
> @@
> typedef bool;
> position p != keep.p;
> @@
>
> - gboolean at p
> + bool
>

With some small modification this works fine now.

The only outstanding problem I'd like to address is patching the 
function calls.

Let's say I have this deceleration (which will be changed by the above
rules):

	int foo(gboolean b);

and some place I call then

	foo(FALSE);

This should be changed to

	foo(false);

> Note that you could never refer to
>
> static gboolean func(gpointer)
>
> because it is not a complete syntactic unit.  If you wanted to mention a
> prototype, you would need a ; after it.  If you wanted to mention the
> definition, then you need to put the complete definition, as shown above.

I see. Thanks again for explaining.

thanks
daniel