|SSA, Java and Points-to Analysis firstname.lastname@example.org (2006-01-26)|
|Re: SSA, Java and Points-to Analysis email@example.com (shrey) (2006-01-28)|
|Re: SSA, Java and Points-to Analysis firstname.lastname@example.org (Diego Novillo) (2006-01-28)|
|Re: SSA, Java and Points-to Analysis email@example.com (Florian Liekweg) (2006-01-28)|
|Re: SSA, Java and Points-to Analysis firstname.lastname@example.org (Jeremy Singer) (2006-01-28)|
|Date:||28 Jan 2006 15:00:06 -0500|
|Posted-Date:||28 Jan 2006 15:00:06 EST|
What you are referring to is the more general problem of "Field
sensitivity", I cant recall the paper but try search with this keyword
As regards flow sensitivity, it is nice to have but such algorithms
are not scalable in real world. So more importance now is on faster,
scalable pointer analysis and so these
have to flow insensitive and may be field insensitive too, but
andersons is field insensitive
> (1) How does the static single assignment for Java three-address
> statements look like in the presence of field references ? For eg, if
> there were two references like :
> a.f = b ;
> a.f = c ;
> then is the equivalent form of SSA this :
> a1.f = b;
> a2.f = c; ?
> Is there any paper/(any other resource) that describes the extension of
> SSA form for object oriented languages ?
> (2) Does the use of SSA for Java help in points to analysis ? Does it
> mean that any flow-insensitive analysis automatically becomes a
> flow-sensitive one ? By the way, is flow-sensitive analysis not that
> important ? I am asking this because the most recent papers on
> points-to analysis for Java I happened to encounter ( extension of
> Anderson's analysis for Java, cloning based context sensitive points to
> analysis for Java ) are flow insensitive.
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.