On Thu, 16 Nov 2017 20:30:24 +0100, SF Markus Elfring wrote:
There is a general source code transformation pattern involved. So I find that it is systematic.
But I did not dare to develop a script variant for the semantic patch language (Coccinelle software) which can handle all special use cases as a few of them are already demonstrated in this tiny patch series.
Then you're doing everything by hands,
I am navigating through possible changes around the pattern “Use common error handling code” mostly manually so far.
and can be wrong
Such a possibility remains as usual.
"As usual" doesn't suffice. It must be "almost perfect" for such a code refactoring. The damage by a overseen mistake is much higher than the merit by such a patch.
If the patch is about fixing a bug, it's a different story. Or it's about a really trivial change (e.g. your sizeof() conversion patches), I can check and apply easily. But for other changes with more lines, it makes little sense. Again, the risk of breakage increases while the merit is negligible.
-- that's the heart of the problem.
There might be related opportunities for further improvements. Do you trust adjustments from an evolving tool more than my concrete contributions?
Yes, loudly.
I stop at this point, as the rest is simply a repeat from the previous mail.
thanks,
Takashi