Results 1  10
of
63
Componential setbased analysis
 ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems
, 1997
"... Setbased analysis (SBA) produces good predictions about the behavior of functional and objectoriented programs. The analysis proceeds by inferring constraints that characterize the data flow relationships of the analyzed program. Experiences with MrSpidey, a static debugger based on SBA, indicate t ..."
Abstract

Cited by 112 (12 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Setbased analysis (SBA) produces good predictions about the behavior of functional and objectoriented programs. The analysis proceeds by inferring constraints that characterize the data flow relationships of the analyzed program. Experiences with MrSpidey, a static debugger based on SBA, indicate that SBA can adequately deal with programs of up to a couple of thousand lines of code. SBA fails, however, to cope with larger programs because it generates systems of constraints that are at least linear, and possibly quadratic, in the size of the analyzed program. This article presents theoretical and practical results concerning methods for reducing the size of constraint systems. The theoretical results include a prooftheoretic characterization of the observable behavior of constraint systems for program components, and a complete algorithm for deciding the observable equivalence of constraint systems. In the course of this development we establish a close connection between the observable equivalence of constraint systems and the equivalence of regulartree grammars. We then exploit this connection to adapt a variety of algorithms for simplifying grammars to the problem of simplifying constraint systems. Based on the resulting algorithms, we have developed componential setbased analysis, a modular and polymorphic variant of SBA. Experimental results verify the effectiveness of the simplification
Introduction to set constraintbased program analysis
 Science of Computer Programming
, 1999
"... ..."
Infinitary Control Flow Analysis: a Collecting Semantics for Closure Analysis
, 1997
"... Defining the collecting semantics is usually the first crucial step in adapting the general methodology of abstract interpretation to the semantic framework or programming language at hand. In this paper we show how to define a collecting semantics for control flow analysis; due to the generality of ..."
Abstract

Cited by 70 (9 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
Defining the collecting semantics is usually the first crucial step in adapting the general methodology of abstract interpretation to the semantic framework or programming language at hand. In this paper we show how to define a collecting semantics for control flow analysis; due to the generality of the formulation we need to appeal to coinduction (or greatest fixed points) in order to define the analysis. We then prove the semantic soundness of the collecting semantics and that all totally deterministic instantiations have a least solution; this incorporates kCFA, polymorphic splitting and a new class of uniformkCFA analyses. 1 Introduction Control flow analysis [16, 17] is known by many names: closure analysis [13, 15], setbased analysis [9] (touching upon other constraintbased analyses [1]), and flow analysis [6]. Although the fine formulational details differ they are all variations over a theme, producing analyses of di#erent precision: 0CFA [16], kCFA [16, 10], polykCF...
From ML to Ada: Stronglytyped Language Interoperability via Source Translation
, 1993
"... We describe a system that supports sourcelevel integration of MLlike functional language code with ANSI C or Ada83 code. The system works by translating the functional code into typecorrect, "vanilla" C or Ada; it offers simple, efficient, typesafe interoperation between new functiona ..."
Abstract

Cited by 66 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We describe a system that supports sourcelevel integration of MLlike functional language code with ANSI C or Ada83 code. The system works by translating the functional code into typecorrect, "vanilla" C or Ada; it offers simple, efficient, typesafe interoperation between new functional code components and "legacy" thirdgenerationlanguage components. Our translator represents a novel synthesis of techniques including userparameterized specification of primitive types and operators; removal of polymorphism by code specialization; removal of higherorder functions using closure datatypes and interpretation; and aggressive optimization of the resulting firstorder code, which can be viewed as encoding the result of a closure analysis. Programs remain fully typed at every stage of the translation process, using only simple, standard type systems. Target code runs at speeds comparable to the output of current optimizing ML compilers, even though handicapped by a conservative garbage collector.
A modular, polyvariant, and typebased closure analysis
 In ICFP ’97 [ICFP97
"... We observe that the principal typing property of a type system is the enabling technology for modularity and separate compilation [10]. We use this technology to formulate a modular and polyvariant closure analysis, based on the rank 2 intersection types annotated with controlflow information. Modu ..."
Abstract

Cited by 57 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
(Show Context)
We observe that the principal typing property of a type system is the enabling technology for modularity and separate compilation [10]. We use this technology to formulate a modular and polyvariant closure analysis, based on the rank 2 intersection types annotated with controlflow information. Modularity manifests itself in a syntaxdirected, annotatedtype inference algorithm that can analyse program fragments containing free variables: a principal typing property is used to formalise it. Polyvariance manifests itself in the separation of different behaviours of the same function at its different uses: this is formalised via the rank 2 intersection types. As the rank 2 intersection type discipline types at least all (core) ML programs, our analysis can be used in the separate compilation of such programs. 1
Abstract interpretation based formal methods and future challenges, invited paper
 Informatics — 10 Years Back, 10 Years Ahead, volume 2000 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science
, 2001
"... Abstract. In order to contribute to the solution of the software reliability problem, tools have been designed to analyze statically the runtime behavior of programs. Because the correctness problem is undecidable, some form of approximation is needed. The purpose of abstract interpretation is to f ..."
Abstract

Cited by 33 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. In order to contribute to the solution of the software reliability problem, tools have been designed to analyze statically the runtime behavior of programs. Because the correctness problem is undecidable, some form of approximation is needed. The purpose of abstract interpretation is to formalize this idea of approximation. We illustrate informally the application of abstraction to the semantics of programming languages as well as to static program analysis. The main point is that in order to reason or compute about a complex system, some information must be lost, that is the observation of executions must be either partial or at a high level of abstraction. In the second part of the paper, we compare static program analysis with deductive methods, modelchecking and type inference. Their foundational ideas are briefly reviewed, and the shortcomings of these four methods are discussed, including when they should be combined. Alternatively, since program debugging is still the main program verification
FlowDirected Closure Conversion for Typed Languages
 In ESOP '00 [ESOP00
, 2000
"... This paper presents a new closure conversion algorithm for simplytyped languages. We have have implemented the algorithm as part of MLton, a wholeprogram compiler for Standard ML (SML). MLton first applies all functors and eliminates polymorphism by code duplication to produce a simplytyped progr ..."
Abstract

Cited by 32 (1 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper presents a new closure conversion algorithm for simplytyped languages. We have have implemented the algorithm as part of MLton, a wholeprogram compiler for Standard ML (SML). MLton first applies all functors and eliminates polymorphism by code duplication to produce a simplytyped program. MLton then performs closure conversion to produce a firstorder, simplytyped program. In contrast to typical functional language implementations, MLton performs most optimizations on the firstorder language, after closure conversion. There are two notable contributions of our work: 1. The translation uses a general flowanalysis framework which includes OCFA. The types in the target language fully capture the results of the analysis. MLton uses the analysis to insert coercions to translate between different representations of a closure to preserve type correctness of the target language program. 2. The translation is practical. Experimental results over a range of benchmarks...
Interconvertibility of a Class of Set Constraints and ContextFreeLanguage Reachability
 TCS
, 1998
"... We show the interconvertibility of contextfreelanguage reachability problems and a class of setconstraint problems: given a contextfreelanguage reachability problem, we show how to construct a setconstraint problem whose answer gives a solution to the reachability problem; given a setconstra ..."
Abstract

Cited by 31 (2 self)
 Add to MetaCart
We show the interconvertibility of contextfreelanguage reachability problems and a class of setconstraint problems: given a contextfreelanguage reachability problem, we show how to construct a setconstraint problem whose answer gives a solution to the reachability problem; given a setconstraint problem, we show how to construct a contextfreelanguage reachability problem whose answer gives a solution to the setconstraint problem. The interconvertibility of these two formalisms offers an conceptual advantage akin to the advantage gained from the interconvertibility of finitestate automata and regular expressions in formal language theory, namely, a problem can be formulated in whichever formalism is most natural. It also offers some insight into the "O(n ) bottleneck" for different types of programanalysis problems and allows results previously obtained for contextfreelanguage reachability problems to be applied to setconstraint problems and vice versa.
Single and loving it: Mustalias analysis for higherorder languages
, 1998
"... In standard controlflow analyses for higherorder languages, a single abstract binding for a variable represents a set of exact bindings, and a single abstract reference cell represents a set of exact reference cells. While such analyses provide useful mayalias information, they are unable to answ ..."
Abstract

Cited by 27 (6 self)
 Add to MetaCart
In standard controlflow analyses for higherorder languages, a single abstract binding for a variable represents a set of exact bindings, and a single abstract reference cell represents a set of exact reference cells. While such analyses provide useful mayalias information, they are unable to answer mustalias questions about variables and cells, as these questions ask about equality of specific bindings and references. In this paper, we present a novel program analysis for higherorder languages that answers mustalias questions. At every program point, the analysis associates with each variable and abstract cell a cardinality, which is either single or multiple. If variable x is single at program point p, then all bindings for x in the heap reachable from the environment at p hold the same value. If abstract cell r is single at p, then at most one exact cell corresponding to r is reachable from the environment at p. Mustalias information facilitates various program optimizations...