On Sat, 10 Sep 2011, Jesper Andersen wrote:
> I'm in Singapore now and will head for Denmark tomorrow so I can't promise
> very instant reponses.
>
> I haven't read the full thread just yet, but I just wanted to clarify one
> thing:
>
> On Saturday, September 10, 2011, Julia Lawall wrote:
> >
> > There was also the question about one or multiple types of changes. I
> > think this is not a problem, but Jesper should confirm. If a patch
> > contains
> > two changes and one can be generalized and the other one cannot for some
> > reason, does spdiff give up on the whole thing, or does it do what it can?
> >
> >
> It's a little difficult to answer this precisely, so let me instead give an
> example and then you can say in what way my example falls short of what you
> thought of.
>
> Suppose we have two functions that changed:
>
> f1=
> void foo() {
> bar(x->dev);
> foz(117);
> }
>
> f2=
> void goo() {
> if(b) bar(y->dev);
> }
>
>
> And the new versions are:
>
> f1'=
> void foo() {
> bar(x);
> foz(117, 42);
> }
>
> f2'=
> void goo() {
> if(b) bar(y);
> }
>
> In this example there are basically three changes:
>
> x->dev becomes x
> y->dev becomes y
> foz(117) becomes foz(117', 42)
>
> In this case spdiff will find: (I just ran it to be sure)
> @@
> expression X0;
> @@
> - bar(X0->dev);
> + bar(X0);
>
> So the one ungeneralizable change was simply not included. Does this cover
> your question Julia?
That seems good. But perhaps the user would like to know about the
elements that were not generalizable as well.
julia
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-wireless" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
