|How to verify that optimizations preserve semantics linuxkaffee_@_gmx.net (Stephan Ceram) (2010-05-11)|
|Re: How to verify that optimizations preserve semantics firstname.lastname@example.org (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bj=F6rn_Franke?=) (2010-05-12)|
|Re: How to verify that optimizations preserve semantics email@example.com (Stefan Monnier) (2010-05-12)|
|Re: How to verify that optimizations preserve semantics firstname.lastname@example.org (Jeremy Wright) (2010-05-13)|
|Re: How to verify that optimizations preserve semantics email@example.com (Tom Crick) (2010-05-13)|
|Re: How to verify that optimizations preserve semantics firstname.lastname@example.org (Walter Banks) (2010-05-14)|
|Re: How to verify that optimizations preserve semantics email@example.com (BGB / cr88192) (2010-05-14)|
|From:||"Jeremy Wright" <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||Thu, 13 May 2010 10:22:22 +0100|
|Posted-Date:||13 May 2010 13:02:34 EDT|
At CC 2004, in Mary Lou Soffa's invited talk, she called for a better
theoretical understanding and underpinning of optimizations and
optimization implementations, rather than yet another register
Prof. Soffa observed (I summarise) that in general we cannot formally
show that optimization actually improve code, that the optimization is
sound, and that the implementation of the optimization is sound.
Has the situation improved since then?
See also this from Mary Lou Soffa's homepage -
"Stephan Ceram" <linuxkaffee_@_gmx.net> wrote in message
> I was wondering how compiler optimisations can be verified,
> i.e. whether they perform always valid code modifications? How is it
> done in practice?
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.