search for: a_int_field

Based on my understanding of her design, following is one obtuse motivating example: -------------------------- class A; class B; int foo(A* p, B* q) { p->a_int_field = 2; q->another_int_field = 3; return p->a_int_field; // !!!!! } ---------------------------------- the *-statement can be optimized into "return 2" if optimizer can prove type-A does not include type-B, and type-B does not include type-A either. On 03/12/2013 07:48 PM, K...

On 3/12/2013 9:56 PM, Shuxin Yang wrote: > Based on my understanding of her design, following is one obtuse > motivating example: > > -------------------------- > class A; > class B; > > int foo(A* p, B* q) { > > p->a_int_field = 2; > q->another_int_field = 3; > return p->a_int_field; // !!!!! > } > ---------------------------------- > > the *-statement can be optimized into "return 2" if optimizer can prove > type-A does not include type-B, > and type-B does not include typ...

On 3/12/2013 9:43 PM, Shuxin Yang wrote: > > Note that, to make base/offset/size more effective, analyzer need to > track the base along the UD chains > as far as possible. In this case, the "bases" for the memory are "p", > instead of &vd and &vc, respectively. If the base pointers are the same, then offset+length for each access is sufficient to

On 03/12/2013 07:21 PM, Krzysztof Parzyszek wrote: > On 3/12/2013 12:13 PM, Manman Ren wrote: > > > > Given > > struct A { > > int x; > > int y; > > }; > > struct B { > > A a; > > int z; > > }; > > struct C { > > B b1; > > B b2; > > }; > > struct D { >