On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 08:57:44AM -0400, Andy Walls wrote: > No human being really code reviews sweeping editorial change like these thoroughly. I wonder if there is some way to verify that people are actually running the Coccinelle script that they say they are without doing anything extra on the side. I use a script to filter out mechanical changes. https://github.com/error27/rename_rev It's kind of a pain in the butt to review something like this. The command would be something like: rename_rev.pl -e 's/(.*?,|^\W+)(.*) \? "enabled" : "disabled"/$1str_enabled_disabled($2)/' -e 's/(.*?,|^\W+)(.*) \? "enable" : "disable"/$1str_enable_disable($2)/' -e 's/(.*,|^\W+)(.*) \? "low" : "high"/$1str_low_high($2)/' -e 's/(.*,|^\W+)(.*) \? "on" : "off"/$1str_on_off($2)/' -e 's/(.*,|^\W+)(.*) \? "true" : "false"/$1str_true_false($2)/' -e 's/(.*,|^\W+)(.*) \? "high" : "low"/$1str_high_low($2)/' -e 's/(.*,|^\W+)(.*) \? "read" : "write"/$1str_read_write($2)/' For every email in the series there was another new str_foo_bar() function so the command line kept getting longer and longer. It doesn't work perfectly, but it's often good enough so I can spot the interesting bits. regards, dan carpenter
