christ.li@xxxxxxxxx schrieb am 01.12.2009 19:49:18: > So you only use sparse as a C source code processing tool. You don't > care about the back end part of the sparse right? Yes, that's right. > In that case, you can try this one line patch. It should preserve the typedef > symbol as the base type. I will not commit that to main line though. > > Will that work for you? Thank you, but I'm sorry, that patch doesn't work for me. The output is the same as before, the base_type of the symbol doesn't have an ident. I'm surprised that the base_type had an ident in former versions of sparse (which didn't also work correctly - I tried to figure out something in the past, see http://marc.info/?l=linux-sparse&m=118171213001092&w=2 ), but now this has changed. In former versions of sparse, this code gave output, even tough it was incorrect: ("sym" is a "struct symbol*" of the symlist returned by sparse() ) struct symbol *type; type = sym->ctype.base_type; if (type->ident) { if (sym->ctype.modifiers & MOD_USERTYPE) fprintf(pFOut, "Typedef=\"%s\" ", type->ident->name); } I tried to compare the function "declaration_specifiers" from sparse 0.4.1 and 0.4.2. The function changed a lot, but I don't understand the changes. Is it really not necessary for compilers (or frontends) to hold the information about declarations with typedefs? Regards, Thomas -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
