search for: rule_case1

...ct into an container. "retraction" peels a field access from the right; "extension" appends a field access at the right. Aliasing Rules -------------- alias(x,y) = rule(x,y) or rule(y,x) rule(x,y) has 3 cases: I> 'x' and 'y' do not have a common struct type rule_case1(x,y) returns true if the last element of 'x' can reach 'y' via type DAG | x | extends | z | super-type | y | II> 'x' and 'y' have a common struct type The field access starting from the first common type should match...

...fixes or suffixes, which is expensive. Yes, handling alias queries based on access path is similar to finding common prefixes/suffixes. As given in the proposal, rule(x,y) where 'x' and 'y' are access paths: Check the first element of 'y', if it is not in 'x', return rule_case1(x,y) Check the next element of 'y' with the next element of 'x', if not the same, return false. When we reach the end of either 'x' or 'y', return true. > > > >> but here you are saying as well. >> So clarification: you are suggesting to add...

On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: > > On Mar 12, 2013, at 12:20 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > >> On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: >>> >>>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:56 PM,

On Mar 12, 2013, at 12:20 PM, Daniel Berlin <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 10:10 AM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >> >> On Mar 11, 2013, at 7:52 PM, Daniel Berlin wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 4:56 PM, Manman Ren <mren at apple.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mar 11, 2013, at 4:23 PM,