Syntax patterns: more statistics.

Stephen Colebourne scolebourne at
Fri Apr 24 09:40:36 PDT 2009

2009/4/24 Ruslan Shevchenko <rssh at>:
> And what mean 'does not work' ?
> Let's define some common small dataset.

These are the patterns that need to be identified for Elvis:
  (a == null ? b : a)
  (a != null ? a : b)
  (null == a ? b : a)
  (null != a ? a : b)

where a is any expression (occurs twice and is exactly the same in
both cases), and b is any expression. Ideally, these same patterns
should also be matched as if-statements, but that will be a lot

The null-safe operator patterns are more complex.

>> I should also note that the iterator remove() only catches remove()
>> within a while-statement, and not within an iterator-driven
>> for-statement.
> Yes. Will be fixed.

>  (I guess iterator-driven for statement does not exist
> in life and usually written as while, but better check all, of course.)

Not so. About 50% of the remove() are in while-statement and 50% in
for-statement in the sourcebase I'm evaluating.


More information about the coin-dev mailing list