All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: elfring@users.sourceforge.net (SF Markus Elfring)
To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
Subject: [Cocci] Determination for the absence of an option in a function call
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 17:00:21 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <96508c06-9473-e558-fba1-7e4db6646ee7@users.sourceforge.net> (raw)

Hello,

I am working with the following specification in some scripts for the semantic
patch language.

?
 target = action(...);
?


This source code search pattern shows that a return value from a function call
should be stored somewhere. The concrete call is restricted by a selection of
function names. Such an approach is working to some degree when restrictions
on function call parameters can be omitted.

But a safer source code analysis requires to distinguish these parameters in
more detail.

1. How should be ensured that a specific option was not passed?

2. The parameter number becomes also relevant then.
   How should functions be split based on their signature?

Regards,
Markus

             reply	other threads:[~2018-02-17 16:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-02-17 16:00 SF Markus Elfring [this message]
2018-02-17 16:05 ` [Cocci] Determination for the absence of an option in a function call Julia Lawall
     [not found]   ` <2b678153-b7c0-6100-6d9c-624bd61e2b78@users.sourceforge.net>
2018-02-17 16:42     ` Julia Lawall
     [not found]       ` <a3c2fbd6-00f4-0113-aab8-4caeed631e1c@users.sourceforge.net>
2018-02-17 17:09         ` Julia Lawall
     [not found]           ` <b65bd20c-de90-2136-b375-246b873cf2a3@users.sourceforge.net>
2018-02-17 17:44             ` Julia Lawall
     [not found]               ` <d6ebe937-81ef-5556-7d00-f7b914521608@users.sourceforge.net>
2018-02-17 18:17                 ` Julia Lawall
     [not found]                   ` <81e498d6-294a-8542-9338-50ca8e96303c@users.sourceforge.net>
2018-02-17 19:05                     ` [Cocci] Handling of variations in function call parameters Julia Lawall
     [not found]               ` <2a43676a-fdee-236c-221e-f75a6bcd24f2@users.sourceforge.net>
2018-02-17 19:47                 ` [Cocci] Determination for the absence of an option in a function call Julia Lawall
     [not found]                   ` <5e69411a-310d-f80b-6bd6-48158f5a1afd@users.sourceforge.net>
2018-02-17 20:25                     ` Julia Lawall
     [not found]                       ` <e0b2f3b9-28bc-f4d4-01fc-f80317926bc4@users.sourceforge.net>
2018-02-17 20:36                         ` [Cocci] Checking for questionable error messages after failed memory allocations Julia Lawall
     [not found]                           ` <ac659e87-6e0a-8c7a-dcd9-fe79035123d6@users.sourceforge.net>
2018-02-17 20:55                             ` Julia Lawall

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=96508c06-9473-e558-fba1-7e4db6646ee7@users.sourceforge.net \
    --to=elfring@users.sourceforge.net \
    --cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.