[Cocci] Re: problems with typecasts

[Carl-Daniel Hailfinger]

On 05.03.2009 19:02, Julia Lawall wrote:
>> The semantic patch above generates the following warnings:
>> warning: line 19: should readb be a metavariable?
>> warning: line 21: should writeb be a metavariable?
>>     
>
> It assumes that anything for which you propose alternatives should be 
> a metavariable.  But for a function name, this is probably not the case.  
> In any case, it follows what you specified, so there is no harm done.
>   

Thanks for the explanation.


>> warning: rule starting on line 13: metavariable a not used in the - or
>> context code
>>     
>
> If you look again, you will see that the last rule declares a but does not 
> use it.
>   

Yes, I noticed that a minute before I saw your mail when I reread the
semantic patch.


If you want to link to the finalized semantic patch and the unified
diff, feel free to do so.
Last post before committing:
http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2009-March/045337.html

The actual commit is posted here:
http://www.coreboot.org/pipermail/coreboot/2009-March/045339.html

Thanks again for your help

Regards,
Carl-Daniel