On Mon, 12 Sep 2016, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 04:43:58PM +0300, Felipe Balbi wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Jarkko Sakkinen <jarkko.sakkinen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Mon, Sep 12, 2016 at 10:54:07AM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > >> > > >> > > >> On Sun, 11 Sep 2016, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > > >> > > >> > On Sun, Sep 11, 2016 at 03:05:42PM +0200, Julia Lawall wrote: > > >> > > Constify local structures. > > >> > > > > >> > > The semantic patch that makes this change is as follows: > > >> > > (http://coccinelle.lip6.fr/) > > >> > > > >> > Just my two cents but: > > >> > > > >> > 1. You *can* use a static analysis too to find bugs or other issues. > > >> > 2. However, you should manually do the commits and proper commit > > >> > messages to subsystems based on your findings. And I generally think > > >> > that if one contributes code one should also at least smoke test changes > > >> > somehow. > > >> > > > >> > I don't know if I'm alone with my opinion. I just think that one should > > >> > also do the analysis part and not blindly create and submit patches. > > >> > > >> All of the patches are compile tested. And the individual patches are > > > > > > Compile-testing is not testing. If you are not able to test a commit, > > > you should explain why. > > > > Dude, Julia has been doing semantic patching for years already and > > nobody has raised any concerns so far. There's already an expectation > > that Coccinelle *works* and Julia's sematic patches are sound. > > > > Besides, adding 'const' is something that causes virtually no functional > > changes to the point that build-testing is really all you need. Any > > problems caused by adding 'const' to a definition will be seen by build > > errors or warnings. > > > > Really, just stop with the pointless discussion and go read a bit about > > Coccinelle and what semantic patches are giving you. The work done by > > Julia and her peers are INRIA have measurable benefits. > > > > You're really making a thunderstorm in a glass of water. > > Hmm... I've been using coccinelle in cyclic basis for some time now. > My comment was oversized but I didn't mean it to be impolite or attack > of any kind for that matter. No problem :) Thanks for the feedback. julia _______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://driverdev.linuxdriverproject.org/mailman/listinfo/driverdev-devel