Advertisement

Modular Control Flow Analysis for Libraries

  • Christian W. Probst
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2477)

Abstract

One problem in analyzing object oriented languages is that the exact control flow graph is not known statically due to dynamic dispatching. However, this is needed in order to apply the large class of known interprocedural analysis. Control Flow Analysis in the object oriented setting aims at determining run-time types of variables, thus allowing to possibly targeted method implementations. We present a flow sensitive analysis that allows separate handling of libraries and thereby efficient analysis of whole programs.

Keywords

Constraint Graph Instance Member Control Flow Graph Load Node Library Code 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    O. Agesen. The Cartesian Product Algorithm: Simple and Precise Typing of Parametric Polymorphism. In Proceedings of the European Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, pages 2–26, 1995.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    M. Alt, U. Aβmann and H. van Someren. Cosy Compiler Phase Embedding with the CoSy Compiler Model. In Proceedings of the Conference on Compiler Construction, 1994.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    D. F. Bacon. Fast and Effective Optimization of Statically Typed Object-Oriented Languages. Technical Report CSD-98-1017, University of California, Berkeley, Oct. 1998.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    R. Chatterjee, B. G. Ryder, and W. Landi. Relevant context inference. In Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 133–146, 1999.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Dean, D. Grove and C. Chambers. Optimization of Object-Oriented Programs Using Static Class Hierarchy Analysis. Technical Report 01-12-94, Washington University, Dec. 1994.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    H. Dewes and C. W. Probst. Static Method Call in Java. In Proceedings of the JOSES Workshop, 2001.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. Fähndrich, J. Foster, Z. Su, and A. Aiken. Partial online cycle elimination in inclusion constraint graphs. In Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 85–96, 1998.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    C. Flanagan and M. Felleisen. Componential set-based analysis. ACM Trans. Programming Languages and Systems, 21(2), pages 370–416, Mar. 1999.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    D. Genius, U. Aβmann, P. Fritzson, H. Sips, R. Kurver, R. Wilhelm, H. Schepers and T. Rindborg. Java and CoSy Technology for Embedded Systems: the JOSES Project. In Proceedings of the Conference on Electronic Commerce, Multimedia, Embedded Systems and Technologies for Business Processes Stockholm, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. T. Hood and K. Kennedy. A Programming Environment for Fortran. In Proceedings of the 18th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, pages 625–637, 1985.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    F. Martin. Generation of Program Analyzers. Ph.D. Thesis, Universität des Saar-landes, 1999.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    F. Nielson, H. R. Nielson and C. L. Hankin. Principles of Program Analysis. Springer-Verlag, 1999.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    C.W. Probst. Flow Sensitive Call Graph Construction For Java. In Proceedings of the JOSES Workshop, 2001.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    C.W. Probst. Control Flow Analysis-An Overview. The JOSES Consortium, 1999.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    T. Ritzau, M. Beemster, F. Liekweg, C.W. Probst. JOC-The JOSES Compiler Presented at The Embedded Systems Show, London, 2000.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    A. Rountev and B. G. Ryder. Points-to and side-effect analyses for programs built with precompiled libraries. Technical Report 423, Rutgers University, Oct. 2000.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    A. Rountev and B. G. Ryder. Practical points-to analysis for programs built with libraries. Technical Report 410, Rutgers University, Feb. 2000.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Z. Su, M. Fähndrich and A. Aiken. Projection Merging: Reducing Redundancies in Inclusion Constraint Graphs. In Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 81–95, 2000.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    V. Sundaresan, L. J. Hendren, C. Razafimahefa, R. Vall’ee-Rai, P. Lam, E. Gagnon and C. Godin. Practical virtual method call resolution for Java. In Proceedings of the Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages and Application, pages 264–280, 2000.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    F. Tip and J. Palsberg. Scalable propagation-based call graph construction algorithms. In Proceedings of the Conference on Object-Oriented Programming, Systems, Languages and Application, pages 281–293, 2000.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christian W. Probst
    • 1
  1. 1.Universität des SaarlandesSaarbrückenGermany

Personalised recommendations