Re: [abc] AAA keynote draft

On Sat, 21 Oct 2006, Oege de Moor wrote:

>>
>> Jimple is clearly a good language for implementing such pointcuts, but if
>> you just expose it in its raw form then the power users will make no effort
>> to specify what their pointcut means. I think that's a recipe for disaster.
>
> I think you have to give programmers the freedom to write any static
> analysis; you need control over how the runtime properties you're after
> are statically approximated.

Could they not specify their pointcut as a combination of runtime
monitoring and a semantics-preserving static analysis that makes it
efficient? That way Jimple need only be exposed to them for the latter
purpose.

> I don't want the audience to get a bad impression of the abc project,
> however.

I doubt that'll happen if you present it as a controversial idea worth
considering.
>
> What's the general feeling? Should I just confine the talk to the popl
> paper, and replace slides 31-45 with more detail of the semantics?
> That's the safe option :-)

I think you're right that it'd be boring.

Ganesh
Received on Sun Oct 22 10:05:51 2006