From: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>
To: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
Cc: Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>,
Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Coccinelle <cocci@systeme.lip6.fr>,
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>
Subject: Re: [Cocci] [PATCH v2] coccinelle: iterators: Add for_each_child.cocci script
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2020 21:01:34 +0200 (CEST) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2010132100350.18876@hadrien> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <trinity-a1f3e64f-e955-45f2-8ee7-0a26c2974e38-1602614175986@3c-app-webde-bs30>
On Tue, 13 Oct 2020, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > > The sorting of macro calls according to an estimated or actual usage frequency
> > > can influence the evaluation characteristics of affected SmPL code,
> > > can't it?
> >
> > No. As I already pointed out, the different macros are disjoint.
>
> This information can be reasonable.
>
>
> > The order doens't matter.
>
> I wonder about such a feedback.
>
> How does it fit to the functionality of SmPL disjunctions?
> Is short-circuit evaluation applied for them?
The rule is applied independently to each node in the control-flow graph.
An example of a node is a loop header. Any given loop header can match
only one of the provided patterns. So the order doesn't matter.
julia
>
>
> > Only one of the patterns will match any given loop.
>
> This is generally fine.
> Will their occurrences vary in significant ways in the analysed source code?
>
> Regards,
> Markus
>
_______________________________________________
Cocci mailing list
Cocci@systeme.lip6.fr
https://systeme.lip6.fr/mailman/listinfo/cocci
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-10-13 19:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <trinity-d2989d61-4401-4280-9989-055536630329-1602595815473@3c-app-webde-bs30>
2020-10-13 13:35 ` [Cocci] [PATCH v2] coccinelle: iterators: Add for_each_child.cocci script Julia Lawall
[not found] ` <trinity-75bb5607-ae06-450d-95a6-fa9cb0aaf732-1602599807925@3c-app-webde-bs30>
2020-10-13 14:48 ` Julia Lawall
[not found] ` <trinity-add9d6f9-2889-4bf6-97b3-83add07516ff-1602607555446@3c-app-webde-bs30>
2020-10-13 16:53 ` Julia Lawall
[not found] ` <trinity-a1f3e64f-e955-45f2-8ee7-0a26c2974e38-1602614175986@3c-app-webde-bs30>
2020-10-13 19:01 ` Julia Lawall [this message]
[not found] ` <trinity-991d9da6-7a4f-4f30-a645-5f4d54b80c53-1602620539556@3c-app-webde-bs30>
2020-10-13 20:24 ` Julia Lawall
[not found] ` <trinity-ceb5e170-ec1a-496c-94bf-eec0c6c4b715-1602654627679@3c-app-webde-bs05>
2020-10-14 6:18 ` Julia Lawall
2020-10-12 17:19 [Cocci] [PATCH V2] " Sumera Priyadarsini
2020-10-13 10:30 ` Julia Lawall
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2010132100350.18876@hadrien \
--to=julia.lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr \
--cc=Markus.Elfring@web.de \
--cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
--cc=michal.lkml@markovi.net \
--cc=nicolas.palix@imag.fr \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).