Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| [9 earlier articles] |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? Martin.Ward@durham.ac.uk (Martin Ward) (2004-01-16) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? vbdis@aol.com (2004-01-16) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? joachim.durchholz@web.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2004-01-18) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2004-01-22) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? lex@cc.gatech.edu (Lex Spoon) (2004-01-22) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? torbenm@diku.dk (2004-01-31) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? witness@t-online.de (Uli Kusterer) (2004-01-31) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? witness@t-online.de (Uli Kusterer) (2004-02-01) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? witness@t-online.de (Uli Kusterer) (2004-02-01) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? joachim.durchholz@web.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2004-02-01) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? joachim.durchholz@web.de (Joachim Durchholz) (2004-02-01) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (2004-02-01) |
| Re: Detecting endless recursion? derkgwen@HotPOP.com (Derk Gwen) (2004-02-01) |
| [11 later articles] |
| From: | Uli Kusterer <witness@t-online.de> |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| Date: | 31 Jan 2004 00:54:11 -0500 |
| Organization: | T-Online |
| References: | 04-01-050 04-01-081 |
| Keywords: | debug |
| Posted-Date: | 31 Jan 2004 00:54:11 EST |
Derk Gwen <derkgwen@HotPOP.com> wrote:
> This is the Halting Problem (TM) is another guise. And it's provably
> nonsolvable for unrestricted programs. It's up to the person writing
> the program to cope with reality. The best you can do is make as many
> resources available as possible and gently as possible deal with
> resource exhaustion.
Hmmm... okay, so I guess it's a platform-specific thing to detect
resource exhaustion early enough.
> In this case, you can do a call graph. Recursion shows up as a
> strongly connected component. If the SCC is cyclic and has no outgoing
> edge to another SCC, then it's easy to see that if execution enters
> the SCC, it will never leave it. This is similar to usesless symbols
> in a context free grammar.
I'm not familiar with "context free grammar"s and such stuff (I'm
mostly self-taught), but I guess a call graph sounds like a sensible
idea. I could probably even do that by analyzing the code before
execution (instead of doing it during compilation), which might provide
another security improvement.
Sounds like an interesting venue to pursue,
-- Uli
http://www.zathras.de <-- back up again!
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.