From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: SF Markus Elfring Date: Sat, 26 Sep 2015 15:22:31 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] coccinelle: assign signed result to unsigned variable Message-Id: <5606B837.7030608@users.sourceforge.net> List-Id: References: <1443099286-16559-1-git-send-email-a.hajda@samsung.com> <56041BE5.5010005@users.sourceforge.net> <56051D2B.5040802@samsung.com> <56064D0B.8060907@users.sourceforge.net> <56066866.1060602@users.sourceforge.net> <56066AD4.9060306@users.sourceforge.net> <560684F3.9090700@users.sourceforge.net> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr > It doesn't matter, as long as the type is available. I suggest to make the circumstances better known when this will be the case. >> How do you think about reuse another data type enumeration there? > > No idea what you mean by this. A SmPL variable can also be connected with a data type list which is discussed here. >> How would you like to manage names for functions which are not defined >> in the current source file? > > Why does it matter in this case? * Will a command-line parameter like "--include-headers-for-types" be needed here? * Would it make sense to work with function name lists in SmPL constraints? Will any fine-tuning be needed for the execution speed of the evolving source code analysis? Regards, Markus