Re: [abc] PLDI paper

From: Ondrej LHOTAK <olhotak@sable.mcgill.ca>
Date: Fri Apr 15 2005 - 02:08:52 BST

On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 04:19:10PM +0100, Oege de Moor wrote:
>
> I went over this section, and found a couple of places where
> the old definition still lurked in the paper, so I've
> changed those.

Yes, those fixes are good. Thanks, Oege.

> Following a brief discussion with Laurie, I've also updated
> the account of reweaving in 4.2.1 substantially, also
> replacing the figure.
>
> Let me know what you think!

The new reweaving stuff is very nice. Great!

Ondrej

>
> -O
>
>
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2005, Ondrej Lhotak wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Apr 09, 2005 at 08:35:32PM +0200, Damien Sereni wrote:
> > > > 8) Damien mentioned a variation of our inter-proc algorithm ... Damien ...
> > > > what was it - something about not needed something on "all paths"?
> > >
> > > I just noticed in chicago that the condition for setting a cflow
> > > residue to alwaysMatch is stronger than it needs to be -
> > >
> > > what i would expect would be
> > > a query shadow qsh is statically true if for every interprocedural
> > > path p to qsh there is an update shadow in p
> > > [where an interprocedural path includes calls but not returns]
> > >
> > > whereas the condition that there is an update shadow sh such that qsh
> > > is in mustCflow(sh) is equivalent to :
> > > every interprocedural path p to qsh goes through sh [ie all paths must
> > > go through the same shadow]
> > >
> > > (please check that i haven't made some mistake along the way!)
> > >
> > > I guess the mustCflow version is probably easier / more efficient to
> > > compute, but maybe we should mention the other one (of course, the
> > > benchmarks show the mustCflow is precise enough)
> >
> > I've updated the discussion of mustcflow in the paper to match the
> > code (which implements the improved condition which Damien describes
> > above) and checked it in. I'd appreciate it if someone had a look at the
> > discussions of mustcflow to make sure that they make sense.
> >
> > Ondrej
> >
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Damien
> > >
> >
>
Received on Fri Apr 15 02:08:56 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Fri Apr 15 2005 - 02:50:07 BST