Re: rethinking syscall tapset

["Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche at redhat dot com>]

Hi -

hunt wrote:

> It's there to help deal with our lack of predicates so I don't have
> to keep making the same changes in different places.

But:

> probe syscall.*, syscall.*.return {
>   if (some expression using pid(), target, and execname()) {
>     if (returnp) /* */ else /* *?
>   }
> }

this could rephrased thusly:

function some_expression_you_like_to_tweak () {
  return (some_expression ...)
}
probe syscall.* {
  if (some_expression_you_like_to_tweak()) next
  print "something"
}
probe syscall.*.return {
  if (some_expression_you_like_to_tweak()) next
  print "something else"
}


> Also, I am planning to eventually make returnp indicate something
> about the return value's type.

Why, considering our static typing?

- FChE