[Soot-list] [Fwd: Re: soot]

[Bruno Neves]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: soot
Date: 	Sun, 06 Nov 2005 17:19:05 -0500
From: 	Patrick Lam <plam at MIT.EDU>
To: 	bsneves at inf.ufrgs.br
References: 	<20051106172427.jr39s429wkwck08s at webmail.inf.ufrgs.br>



You really should send mail to soot-list, so that the mail is then 
archived for future reference.  Please forward this mail to soot-list 
for that reason.

It was an explicit design decision when creating Baf to abstract away 
from the exact bytecodes, because such information is usually not what 
you need to know.  However, if you cause the instruction to toString 
itself, then you'll find out the exact instruction you have.

pat

bsneves at inf.ufrgs.br wrote:
> Dear Patrick,
> 
> I 'm a Msc. student at Federal University of Rio Grande.
> I want use Soot to make a trace of some applications, but I need distinguish
> exactly the instructions executed by the machine. In the Baf level, I found
> only high level definitions for each instrucion type, for example: LoadInst.
> However, what I need to know is the specific executed instrucion, like: iload, ,
> iload_1, iload_2, aload... and so on.
> 
> Can I get this specific result using soot?
> 
> Best regards and tank you for any help!
> 
> Bruno Neves
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
> 



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.CS.McGill.CA/pipermail/soot-list/attachments/20051106/4ddcfcc0/attachment.htm