From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: elfring@users.sourceforge.net (SF Markus Elfring)
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2014 11:37:56 +0100
Subject: [Cocci] Finding function implementations that call only a
 single function.
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1412071125130.2044@localhost6.localdomain6>
References: <5478F848.1080808@users.sourceforge.net>
 <5481BF42.9040503@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1412051633240.2360@hadrien>
 <54820FEF.4080901@users.sourceforge.net>
 <54834F76.1090104@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.10.1412061955440.2042@hadrien>
 <548358DE.6020409@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1412062139570.2256@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <548371FB.9060402@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1412062219530.2256@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <54837413.8000902@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1412062232470.2256@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <5483806D.3070805@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1412062342540.2256@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <5483902E.8060109@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1412070749130.2044@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <54841AB2.6070609@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1412071027040.2044@localhost6.localdomain6>
 <54842A73.4000203@users.sourceforge.net>
 <alpine.DEB.2.02.1412071125130.2044@localhost6.localdomain6>
Message-ID: <54842E04.9060800@users.sourceforge.net>
To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
List-Id: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr

>> One part of each SmPL disjunction will always not match in this approach
>> if an analysed function implementation has got the return type "void".
>> Would the specification of a metavariable "return_type" be also
>> unnecessary and inappropriate in this use case?
> 
> Currently, return_type does absolutely nothing.  You can just drop it.

Should I really omit to distinguish the function return type?

When should a filter pattern on function implementations be adapted to
the property that there will be a return value affected (or not)?

Regards,
Markus