From: Markus Elfring <Markus.Elfring@web.de>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@inria.fr>,
Denis Efremov <efremov@linux.com>,
Coccinelle <cocci@systeme.lip6.fr>
Cc: Michal Marek <michal.lkml@markovi.net>,
Gilles Muller <Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr>,
Nicolas Palix <nicolas.palix@imag.fr>,
kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: coccinelle: api: add device_attr_show script
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2020 16:27:50 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <6ce5346f-127d-e2fd-c703-9adf21060e30@web.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.22.394.2006151742090.23306@hadrien>
>> +virtual report, org, context, patch
>>
>> Is such a SmPL code variant more succinct?
>
> This doens't matter.
Can less duplicate code be a bit nicer?
>>> +ssize_t show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr, char *buf)
>>> +{
>>> + <...
>>> +* return snprintf@p(...);
>>> + ...>
>>> +}
>>
>> I suggest to reconsider the selection of the SmPL nest construct.
>> https://github.com/coccinelle/coccinelle/blob/e06b9156dfa02a28cf3cbf0913a10513f3d163ab/docs/manual/cocci_syntax.tex#L783
>>
>> Can the construct “<+... … ...+>” become relevant here?
>
> <... ...> is fine if the only thing that will be used afterwards is what
> is inside the <... ...>
I propose once more to distinguish better if the shown return statement
may be really treated as optional for such a source code search approach
(or not).
Regards,
Markus
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-06-15 16:27 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-06-15 14:04 [PATCH] coccinelle: api: add device_attr_show script Markus Elfring
2020-06-15 15:43 ` Julia Lawall
2020-06-15 16:27 ` Markus Elfring [this message]
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=6ce5346f-127d-e2fd-c703-9adf21060e30@web.de \
--to=markus.elfring@web.de \
--cc=Gilles.Muller@lip6.fr \
--cc=cocci@systeme.lip6.fr \
--cc=efremov@linux.com \
--cc=julia.lawall@inria.fr \
--cc=kernel-janitors@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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).