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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08428C433E0 for ; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:01:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from isis.lip6.fr (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 89252207E8 for ; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 18:01:07 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 89252207E8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=inria.fr Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr Received: from systeme.lip6.fr (systeme.lip6.fr [132.227.104.7]) by isis.lip6.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTP id 05PI0qOL002070; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 20:00:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from systeme.lip6.fr (systeme.lip6.fr [127.0.0.1]) by systeme.lip6.fr (Postfix) with ESMTP id 085DF7773; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 20:00:52 +0200 (CEST) Received: from isis.lip6.fr (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by systeme.lip6.fr (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3207F410A for ; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 20:00:50 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr (mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr [192.134.164.104]) by isis.lip6.fr (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPS id 05PI0nQO001387 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK) for ; Thu, 25 Jun 2020 20:00:49 +0200 (CEST) X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.75,280,1589234400"; d="scan'208";a="352748886" Received: from abo-173-121-68.mrs.modulonet.fr (HELO hadrien) ([85.68.121.173]) by mail3-relais-sop.national.inria.fr with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 25 Jun 2020 20:00:49 +0200 Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2020 20:00:48 +0200 (CEST) From: Julia Lawall X-X-Sender: jll@hadrien To: Markus Elfring In-Reply-To: <79cbff87-a004-aa34-1b1c-6229c645389d@web.de> Message-ID: References: <79cbff87-a004-aa34-1b1c-6229c645389d@web.de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.22 (DEB 394 2020-01-19) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, Sender e-mail whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]); Thu, 25 Jun 2020 20:00:52 +0200 (CEST) X-Greylist: Sender passed SPF test, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.4.3 (isis.lip6.fr [132.227.60.2]); Thu, 25 Jun 2020 20:00:49 +0200 (CEST) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 132.227.60.2 X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.78 on 132.227.60.2 Cc: Coccinelle Subject: Re: [Cocci] Checking the parsing for a specific SmPL disjunction X-BeenThere: cocci@systeme.lip6.fr X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr Errors-To: cocci-bounces@systeme.lip6.fr On Thu, 25 Jun 2020, Markus Elfring wrote: > >> @display@ > >> expression x, y; > >> @@ > >> *y = ... *(x) ... > > > > This is probably not what you think. It is an assignment of y to a > > multiplication followed by some other code (the second ...). > > I would interpret such a source code search approach in the way > that a varying expression which contains one known (?) operation > is assigned to an other target. > > Can the ambiguity for the asterisk (before the parentheses) be avoided? > > > Should the following script variant for the semantic patch language > match only code with pointer dereferences? > > @display@ > expression* x; > expression y; > @@ > *y = ... *(x) ... There is no ... like this at the expression level. You can say <+... *(x) ...+> if you want *(x) to be a subexpression of the right hand side. julia > > > > >> @display@ > >> expression action, x, y; > >> @@ > >> ( > >> *y = ... *(x) ... > >> | > >> *action(..., x, ...) > >> ) > > May I expect that such SmPL disjunctions should also work? > > Regards, > Markus > _______________________________________________ Cocci mailing list Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci