From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EABC5C43334 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 18:05:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230369AbiGASFC (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2022 14:05:02 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:38166 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229606AbiGASFB (ORCPT ); Fri, 1 Jul 2022 14:05:01 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [104.130.231.41]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0F7453BBF3 for ; Fri, 1 Jul 2022 11:04:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 9631 invoked by uid 109); 1 Jul 2022 18:04:59 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Fri, 01 Jul 2022 18:04:59 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 27542 invoked by uid 111); 1 Jul 2022 18:04:58 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Fri, 01 Jul 2022 14:04:58 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2022 14:04:58 -0400 From: Jeff King To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , Derrick Stolee , Elijah Newren Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/4] cocci: add and apply a rule to find "unused" strbufs Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 01, 2022 at 12:30:56PM +0200, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > The use of "with strict" here will be explained and amended in the > following commit. Really s/the following/a following/ now that there's another commit in between. :) I didn't find the comment there very enlightening, though. It says we're dropping "with strict" to catch some new cases around early returns. But it's not clear to me what "strict" does in the first place, why we'd want it, or what we might be losing by dropping it. I know, I can probably go read the coccinelle docs to figure it out, but it might be worth saying why it's worth including in the first place somewhere (either here or in the follow-up commit). -Peff