Re: [abc] A comment from Nasko Rountev

I think this is a good topic to mention as possible future extensions
in the AOSD paper. I think we already have some control-flow type
pointcuts on our list, and here we can see a concrete use of them.

Cheers, Laurie

+-------------------------------------------------------------+
| Laurie Hendren, Professor, School of Computer Science |
| McGill University |
| 318 McConnell Engineering Building tel: (514) 398-7391 |
| 3480 University Street fax: (514) 398-3883 |
| Montreal, Quebec H3A 2A7 hendren@cs.mcgill.ca |
| CANADA http://www.sable.mcgill.ca/~hendren |
+-------------------------------------------------------------+

On Wed, 22 Sep 2004, 'Ondrej Lhotak' wrote:

> I've received an e-mail from Nasko Rountev about various things he's up
> to. He's interested in using abc for instrumentation. Since we're all
> interested in user comments, I'm passing his comments/questions along.
> It's something to think about for future extensions/extensibility.
>
> Ondrej
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Atanas Rountev <rountev@cse.ohio-state.edu> -----
>
> <... non-abc stuff deleted ...>
>
> > 3. I am also interested in the dynamic analysis stuff - in particular, good ways
> > to get instrumentation all over the place. Right now we are using Soot to create
> > instrumented bytecode (we just add a bunch of Jimple statements wherever we
> > need), but as a long-term solution something based on aspects seems a better
> > choice. I would be very curious to learn about your experience with "abc" in
> > terms of setting up all kinds of crazy dynamic analyses. In particular, does
> > "abc" allow CFG edge/node instrumentation? Of course, there isn't an explicit
> > CFG, but there is an implicit one in the bytecode.
> >
> > Nasko
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
Received on Wed Sep 22 14:55:07 2004