Checked in initial version of "wrap" transformation. #2
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The transformation is working reasonably well at at this point, but it seems to be being hit by some oink bugs. (See XXX comments in most recent commit).
I want to change this so that, instead of creating a function called ___wrapper_foo() that calls foo(), it will rename foo() to ___original_foo() and generate a new foo() that will call the original version. This should reduce the size of the resulting patches, and automatically handle corner cases, such as invocations via function pointers. My intuition is that it's a cleaner way to handle C++ constructs, but I haven't thought through all of the cases.