[Soot-list] How to deal with "Return" using wjop.si from SOOT?

[Zhoulai]

I guess it might help to put the code after inlining here. It can be seen
that the statement 'return 0' from foo() is abandonned by the analysis; I
was using this command line:
java -Xmx4096m soot.Main -f J -cp target/classes/ -pp -w -W -f J -p
wjop.sion  tester.Test12 -d sootOutput_inline

public class tester.Test12 extends java.lang.Object
{

    public void <init>()
    {
        tester.Test12 r0;

        r0 := @this: tester.Test12;
        specialinvoke r0.<java.lang.Object: void <init>()>();
        return;
    }

    public static void main(java.lang.String[])
    {
        java.lang.String[] r0;

        r0 := @parameter0: java.lang.String[];
        return;
    }

    public static int foo()
    {
        return 0;
    }
}

On Wed, May 22, 2013 at 11:39 AM, Zhoulai <zell08v at orange.fr> wrote:

> Hi, all,
>
> I have a naive question on how to deal with "RETURN" with the the wjop.sioptimisation from Soot. Typically, I want to verify the value of 'x' is
> zero after we call x = foo(); with ' foo' being a method that returns 0.
>
>  Below is a running example. I think it is possible to do this with a
> simple intra-procedural value analysis (say, interval analysis) plus an
> inlining. However, I find out the "inlining" from wjop phase ignores
> 'return' (Probably this is not related with SOOT itself).
>
> My question is :
>
>  whether SOOT already has some code transformation phase so that, for
> example, 'return a' will modify an artificial instance variable _a, which
> can then be captured by SOOT's inlining?
>
> Thank you. Below is the example code.
>
> Zhoulai
>
> public class Test12 {
>      public static void main(String[] args) {
>          int x;
>          x = foo();;
>      }
>
> public  static int foo() {
>     return 0;
>
>     }
> }
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.cs.mcgill.ca/pipermail/soot-list/attachments/20130522/8a136a2b/attachment.html