Re: [abc-users] Re: Strange effect in Baf to Jasmin conversion

I want to thank you all for making a tremendous effort in helping me
take the stress away, I have been trying for two weeks to figure out
what the problem was and finally after your help, I’m able to run my
work without any EXCEPTIONS.

Thank you Eric, Patrick, Julian and all the others who had the time to
help me.

Amjad

Eric Bodden wrote:
> This should be fixed now. I checked in a change which makes Soot
> validate the condition that identity statements come first when the
> validation flag is enabled. Furthermore abc now runs an
> IdentityStmtNormalizer in its jtp phase to ensure that these
> requirements be met.
>
> Amjad, if you try out the latest SVN version your should actually not
> be seeing this problem any more.
>
> Eric
>
> On 17/04/2008, Eric Bodden <eric.bodden_at_mail.mcgill.ca> wrote:
>
>> Hi all.
>>
>> After some discussion with Patrick it seems that indeed there exists
>> an implicit condition that identity statements have to be the first
>> statements in a Jimple (and Baf) body. (I remember this having come up
>> before but I could never quite explain why.)
>>
>> So there's two things we can do in abc, either check this condition or
>> enforce it. I personally think that enforcing would be nicer and
>> indeed when looking at this method it seems that the person who
>> implemented the method had something like this in mind:
>>
>> abc.soot.util.Restructure.getThisLocal(SootMethod)
>>
>> (the code that would do the actual restructuring is commented out)
>>
>> What's your opinion on this?
>>
>>
>> Eric
>>
>>
>> On 17/04/2008, Patrick Lam <plam_at_cs.mcgill.ca> wrote:
>> > Eric Bodden wrote:
>> > > Thanks for the detailed explanation Patrick. After reading the
>> > > relevant portion of the specification (see below), I wonder whether
>> > > not actually the local variable packer should ensure that local
>> > > variable 0 is never written to and if that would not be the "more
>> > > correct" fix. Of course one could also enforce that identity
>> > > statements always come first in Jimple (and Baf) but that would add
>> > > yet another constraint on the developer.
>> >
>> >
>> > I don't like that as much as enforcing the Jimple/Baf conditions,
>> > because it means that the local variable packer needs to know whether or
>> > not the method is an instance method or a static method. The Jimple/Baf
>> > condition is something that really ought to be checked, and it just
>> > makes sense anyway: identity statements should come first (or at the
>> > head of exception-catching blocks).
>> >
>> > pat
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Eric Bodden
>> Sable Research Group
>> McGill University, Montréal, Canada
>>
>>
>
>
>
Received on Sat Apr 19 2008 - 02:02:27 BST