From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: elfring@users.sourceforge.net (SF Markus Elfring)
Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2015 14:55:34 +0100
Subject: [Cocci] Searching with SmPL for missing clean-up settings in
 designated initialisers
In-Reply-To: <20151203234832.GB20409@wotan.suse.de>
References: <56603DC3.8040609@hurleysoftware.com>
 <56608E06.9060003@metafoo.de> <alpine.DEB.2.10.1512032310280.2777@hadrien>
 <20151203234832.GB20409@wotan.suse.de>
Message-ID: <56619B56.7040508@users.sourceforge.net>
To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
List-Id: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr

> virtual context                                                                 
>                                                                                 
> @ is_tty @                                                                      
> identifier fops;                                                                
> @@                                                                              
> struct tty_operations fops = {                                                  
> };                                                                              
>                                                                                 
> @ tty_has_cleanup depends on is_tty @                                           
> identifier is_tty.fops;                                                         
> identifier fn;                                                                  
> @@                                                                              
> struct tty_operations fops = {                                                  
>         .cleanup = fn,                                                          
> };                                                                              
>                                                                                 
> @ depends on is_tty && !tty_has_cleanup && context @                            
> identifier is_tty.fops;                                                         
> @@                                                                              
> * struct tty_operations fops = {                                                
> };

How do you think about a SmPL approach like the following?


virtual show_context_diff

@contains_member_functions@                                                                      
identifier var;
struct operations =~ "^(?x)
(?:
   \w+_operations
|
   (?:
# Alternation placeholder
   )
)$";
@@
 operations var = { ... };                                                                              
                                                                                
@contains_cleanup_function
 contains_member_functions@                                           
expression assign;                                                                  
identifier release =~ "^(?x)
(?:
   cleanup
|
   (?:
# Another alternation placeholder
   )
)$",
           contains_member_functions.var;                                                         
type contains_member_functions.operations;                                                         
@@                                                                              
 operations var = { ...,
                    .cleanup = (assign),
                    ...
                  };                                                                              
                                                                                
@show_member_functions
 depends on show_context_diff
            && contains_member_functions
            && !contains_cleanup_function@
identifier contains_member_functions.var;                                                         
struct contains_member_functions.operations;                                                         
@@                                                                              
*operations var = { ... };                                                                              


Would this SmPL script variant need any further fine-tuning
(or other software extensions)?

Regards,
Markus