[Soot-list] Bug in shimple transformation ?

[Navindra Umanee]

Hah.  Nice work.

Indeed, I wasn't particularly careful about performance when fixing
this bug, just did what seemed like the most straightforward thing.
I'll see what I can do and if I can eliminate the need for the
GuaranteedDefs analysis, or at least optimise it.

Jonas.Lundberg at msi.vxu.se <Jonas.Lundberg at msi.vxu.se> wrote:
> 1. I always get a JimpleBody when using retrieveActiveBody(),    
> even in cases when I use the options set_whole_shimple(true).
> What is the point of using set_whole_shimple if not to get 
> Shimple bodies?

This sounds like a bug, I'll take a look this weekend.  Indeed I think
retrieveActiveBody should probably return a ShimpleBody in this case.

> 2. I first create a JimpleBody and after that, by  
> Shimple.v().newBody, I create a ShimpleBody. Is this a stupid 
> approach or is it the way Shimple bodies are created in any 
> case?

This is the way you would do it normally...  Shimple is constructed
from Jimple.

Thanks,
Navin.