Question about typedef

[peckto]

I have a question about the representation of C typedef statements in the cpg.

Example:

#include <stdio.h>

typedef int MyInt;

struct  MyS {
    int a;
    int b;
    MyInt c;
};

typedef struct MyS MyS_t;

int main() {
    struct MyS s1;
    MyS_t s2;

    return 0;
}

When loading the sample C code via cpg-vis-neo4j (cpg v3.5.1), the graph looks like the following:

When analyzing structs (where typedefs are often used), it would be nice, to have an RECORD_DECLARATION edge between the ObjectType MyS_t and the Declaration of MyS. In this way the Declaration of s1 and s2 could be resolved the same way. In the current cpg, the only way I see to resolve this problem is to create a link between the VariableDeclaration MyS_t and the ObjectType MyS_t based the name.

Can you reproduce this behavior? Is there a different way, to resolve the Declaration of s2?

[Masrepus]

Typedefs are generally supported, as you can see with the TypedefDeclaration child of the TranslationUnitDeclaration that maps MyInt to int. The concrete case you have here is unfortunately parsed in a wrong way by the typedef handling mechanisms