On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 10:40 PM, René Scharfe <l.s.r@xxxxxx> wrote: > Am 16.01.2018 um 18:11 schrieb SZEDER Gábor: >> Unfortunately, most of the changes coming from 'strbuf.cocci' don't >> make any sense, they appear to be the mis-application of the "use >> strbuf_addstr() instead of strbuf_addf() to add a single string" rule: >> >> - strbuf_addf(&sb_repo, "%d", counter); >> + strbuf_addstr(&sb_repo, counter); >> >> It seems that those rules need some refinement, but I have no idea >> about Coccinelle and this is not the time for me to dig deeper. >> >> What makes all this weird is that running 'make coccicheck' on my own >> machine doesn't produce any of these additional proposed changes, just >> like at René's. Can it be related to differing Coccinelle versions? >> Travis CI installs 1.0.0~rc19.deb-3; I have 1.0.4.deb-2. > > The version difference may explain it, but I couldn't find a matching > bugfix in http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/distrib/changes.html when I just > skimmed it. I wonder if the following patch could make a difference: Yes, it does, now all those nonsense suggestions are gone on Travis CI. https://travis-ci.org/szeder/git/jobs/330572425#L713 Those "memmove() -> MOVE_ARRAY" suggestions are still there, of course. > --- > contrib/coccinelle/strbuf.cocci | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/contrib/coccinelle/strbuf.cocci b/contrib/coccinelle/strbuf.cocci > index 1d580e49b0..6fe8727421 100644 > --- a/contrib/coccinelle/strbuf.cocci > +++ b/contrib/coccinelle/strbuf.cocci > @@ -29,8 +29,9 @@ cocci.include_match("%" not in fmt) > > @@ > expression E1, E2; > +format F =~ "s"; > @@ > -- strbuf_addf(E1, "%s", E2); > +- strbuf_addf(E1, "%@F@", E2); > + strbuf_addstr(E1, E2); > > @@ > -- > 2.16.0
