Re: automatic hooks generation

"Ira Baxter" <>
8 Nov 2002 11:03:18 -0500

          From comp.compilers

Related articles
automatic hooks generation (Roman Shaposhnick) (2002-11-07)
Re: automatic hooks generation (Ira Baxter) (2002-11-08)
Re: automatic hooks generation (Ralph Corderoy) (2002-12-01)
| List of all articles for this month |

From: "Ira Baxter" <>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: 8 Nov 2002 11:03:18 -0500
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 02-11-034
Keywords: tools
Posted-Date: 08 Nov 2002 11:03:18 EST

"Roman Shaposhnick" <> wrote in message
> I'm looking for any suggestions on what would be the most easy way to
> implement something that is similar to "tracing" using existing
> compilers like gcc. <snip>
> What I'm looking for is a logical extension of these methods where I
> can ask compiler to put probes ( calls to a specific function ) at
> places like entry/exit from functions, etc.
> Once approach that I have in mind is a c2c translator, which is not
> an excellent option, given that it requires an extra step during a
> compilation process and is highly vulnerable to non-portable extensions
> implemented by FCC and many others.

See the white paper on how to implement test coverage using program
transformations at It
makes the additional rather obvious point that if you can insert test
coverage probes by program transformation, you can insert all kind of
other probes pretty easily. Yes, it uses what amounts to X2X
translator, with X replaced by the programming language of interest.
We've C test coverage this way.
Ira D. Baxter, Ph.D., CTO 512-250-1018
Semantic Designs, Inc.

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.