|terminology: double-rooted DAG? firstname.lastname@example.org (Mark Harrison) (1998-03-03)|
|Re: terminology: double-rooted DAG? email@example.com (1998-03-06)|
|Re: terminology: double-rooted DAG? firstname.lastname@example.org (1998-03-06)|
|Re: terminology: double-rooted DAG? email@example.com (Vladimir Alexiev) (1998-03-07)|
|Re: terminology: double-rooted DAG? firstname.lastname@example.org (Mark Harrison) (1998-03-07)|
|Re: terminology: double-rooted DAG? email@example.com (1998-03-08)|
|From:||"Mark Harrison" <firstname.lastname@example.org>|
|Date:||7 Mar 1998 22:45:09 -0500|
Dwight VandenBerghe wrote in message 98-03-045...
>>I have a DAG data structure that has two special
>>1. It always has a defined root node (like a tree), and
>>2. There is also a "tail" node, which is like the root
>> node except at the opposite end of the graph.
>Isn't this what is called a "converging" or "confluent"
>[This thing sure has a lot of names. -John]
But wait, there's more...
Aaron Kaplan suggests that it can also be called an acyclic control
flow graph, noting that "cfgs have that structure (one root, one
exitnode) but they can - in the general case- have cycles. Hence this
suggestion 'acyclic cfg'."
Also, Carl Sturtivant notes "source" and "sink" are commonly used to
refer to what I was calling the "roots".
M. Anton Ertl also identified the structure as a lattice, and Amit
Bhatnagar identified the general problem as a "source and sink"
Thanks again to everybody!
Mark Harrison at AsiaInfo Computer Networks, Beijing China
Return to the
Search the comp.compilers archives again.