[Cocci] Support for C++ delete expressions?

[Cocci] Support for C++ delete expressions?

[SF Markus Elfring]

Hello,

The information ?make a small attempt to parse C++ files? is provided for
the parameter ?--c++? of the program ?spatch?.
How does the software development situation look like for the handling
of ?delete expressions??
http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/delete

Regards,
Markus

[Cocci] Support for C++ delete expressions?

[Julia Lawall]

On Sun, 3 Jun 2018, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> Hello,
>
> The information ?make a small attempt to parse C++ files? is provided for
> the parameter ?--c++? of the program ?spatch?.
> How does the software development situation look like for the handling
> of ?delete expressions??

Delete is handled.  If there is some example for which the result is not
satisfactory, you would have to provide it.

julia

> http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/delete
>
> Regards,
> Markus
> _______________________________________________
> Cocci mailing list
> Cocci at systeme.lip6.fr
> https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
>

[Cocci] Support for C++ delete expressions

[Julia Lawall]

delete [] is now supported by the C++ parser (ie with option --c++).  Note
that no C++ specific operators are supported by the semantic patch
language.

julia

[Cocci] Support for C++ delete expressions

[Julia Lawall]

On Mon, 25 Jun 2018, SF Markus Elfring wrote:

> > delete [] is now supported by the C++ parser (ie with option --c++).
>
> This is nice.
>
>
> > Note that no C++ specific operators are supported by the semantic
> > patch language.
>
> How will the software situation evolve further for corresponding key words?
>
> Would you ever like to support a source code transformation
> where unnecessary null pointer checks can be removed before
> such delete statements?
>
> Another description:
> https://clang.llvm.org/extra/clang-tidy/checks/readability-delete-null-pointer.html

C++ is not a priority for me personally.  If someone wants to fund adding
better support for C++, that would probably be good for Coccinelle.

julia

>
> Regards,
> Markus
>

[Cocci] Checking evolution around software build parameters

[Thierry Martinez]

SF Markus Elfring?:
> /usr/bin/ocamlc.opt -c commons/proc_pidpath_stubs.c
> gcc: error: unrecognized command line option
> ?-fstack-clash-protection?; did you mean ?-fstack-protector??

Thank you for reporting this. It seems that ocamlc assumes a version
of GCC more recent than the version installed on your system.

In commit c619caf8 (github master), I removed the C stubs and replaced
by pure OCaml implementations. The problem should have disappeared now.

Cheers,
-- 
Thierry.

SF Markus Elfring?:
>> delete [] is now supported by the C++ parser (ie with option --c++).
>
> Thanks for this software extension.
>
> Now I am curious on collateral evolution around this information.
>
> elfring at Sonne:~/Projekte/Coccinelle/20160205> git checkout master && git pull && ./autogen && ./configure && grep VERSION=1 Makefile.config && LANG=C make world
> ?
> VERSION=1.0.6-00452-g175de16b
> ?
> /usr/bin/ocamlc.opt -c commons/proc_pidpath_stubs.c
> gcc: error: unrecognized command line option ?-fstack-clash-protection?; did you mean ?-fstack-protector??
> make: *** [Makefile:633: commons/proc_pidpath_stubs.o] Error 2
>
>
> Are there any special dependencies to consider for the usage of
> the software ?OCaml 4.05.0-5.1? (on my openSUSE development system)?
>
> Regards,
> Markus