From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2015 14:36:50 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: tests: unsigned value cannot be lesser than zero Message-Id: <55F82D02.5010004@users.sourceforge.net> List-Id: References: <1442309232-5902-1-git-send-email-a.hajda@samsung.com> <55F816BC.5050407@users.sourceforge.net> <55F8204D.3080606@samsung.com> In-Reply-To: <55F8204D.3080606@samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr > If you think about removing all u* typedefs I became interested in the use case to consider more type definitions besides the ones which should usually be handled for Linux source files. > it will result in omitting u* related comparisons, > unless you use --recursive-includes option. How do you think about to make this source code analysis parameter configurable? >>> +{unsigned char, unsigned short int, unsigned int, unsigned long, unsigned long long, size_t, u8, u16, u32, u64} v; How does the data type "size_t" fit into the suggested SmPL approach? Would you like to reuse your approach for checking of more software eventually? Regards, Markus