similar to: [LLVMdev] Google Summer of Code Idea

> No > I've got a BDD based version of andersen's around already (uncommitted). > It's slower in time (by a factor of 8 or so), but very slightly (1-2 > megabytes of memory) more memory efficient on some cases. Nowadays, > the bitmap version is actually more memory efficient than the BDD > version, even if you turn off BDD caching, etc. > > The thing you

On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 1:43 PM, Richard Warburton <richard.warburton at gmail.com> wrote: > This email is written on the premise that LLVM will be involved in > GSOC again this year. I noted that the wiki's open projects page [0] > has several possible projects, that seem suitable for a summer of code > project. I am writing this email to this list with the hope of >

On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 6:55 PM, Richard Warburton <richard.warburton at gmail.com> wrote: > > No > > I've got a BDD based version of andersen's around already (uncommitted). > > It's slower in time (by a factor of 8 or so), but very slightly (1-2 > > megabytes of memory) more memory efficient on some cases. Nowadays, > > the bitmap version is

On Wed, Mar 5, 2008 at 3:44 AM, Xi Wang <xi.wang at gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Mar 3, 2008 at 6:55 PM, Richard Warburton > > <richard.warburton at gmail.com> wrote: > > > > No > > > I've got a BDD based version of andersen's around already (uncommitted). > > > It's slower in time (by a factor of 8 or so), but very slightly (1-2

FWIW, Ben Hardekopf asked me to post this for him on the subject Regarding Whaley and Lam's BDD-based approach to context-sensitive analysis, there is a paper by the same research group (Avots et al in ICSE'05) that adapts their technique for C. The results are not very encouraging -- their system doesn't scale nearly as well for C as it did for Java. The primary difference is that

On Feb 28, 2008, at 10:43 AM, Richard Warburton wrote: > This email is written on the premise that LLVM will be involved in > GSOC again this year. I hope so too! > I would be looking to implement a context-sensitive alias analysis. > Whilst I accept that this isn't the most efficient category of alias > analysis, I think the implementation of such an analysis, that trades

> Ok. I think the most important thing to keep in mind, if you want > this to be useful for LLVM, is for it to be sound in the presence of > incomplete programs. I think it would be very interesting to have a > BDD based analysis in LLVM, it would be useful for performance > comparisons and many other things, even if it isn't turned on by > default. However, it must

Hello Daniel, Thank you for your comments and sorry for my mistakes, I'll revise them. And I'll for sure read the paper you mentioned and survey the recent researches before deciding the implementation technique. To George: May I know the exact plan of your attempt for making cfl-aa interprocedural? I do think that this is the most valuable part of my proposal, but that makes no sense to

On Mar 1, 2008, at 3:40 AM, Richard Warburton wrote: >> Also, LLVM benefits quite a bit from mod/ref info for function. I >> don't know if you've thought about it at all, but it is an important >> problem. If you're interested, my thesis describes these issues in >> detail. > > I'll peruse this, are there any other relevant, LLVM specific texts >

Hello John, I've finished the first version of my proposal on enhancing alias analysis. The proposal can be downloaded at http://james0zan.github.io/resource/GSoC15-Proposal-AA.pdf. I hope I've successfully justified the necessity and benefits of this project. If possible, please find some time to review it and give me some more feedbacks. Thank you very much! P.S. I'm working on

Thanks for the replies, Daniel and Matthijs. I added some code to generate the copy constraint, which I think (in the present form) is wrong (or at best not field sensitive): +void Andersens::visitGetResultInst(GetResultInst &GR) { + if (isa<PointerType>(GR.getType())) + { + // P1 = getresult P2 --> <Copy/P1/P2> +

Hi I hope this is not OT. I''m training my replacement at work to do BDD Rails development. He''s done a CS/maths degree but has no professional programming experience, so he''s never NOT done a project without BDD. In a way I am jealous of his unspoilt situation :) I''ve gone about things this way: * first teach him some Ruby (he did mainly Java at

Hi everyone, We went ahead a created a BDD mailing list in Google to talk towards BDD and how it can be applied to just software development in general (language agnostic). We try to mediate the usage of language syntax but occasionally it creeps up in there. We would love to have Ruby BDD''rs (is that a word) lend their perspective on BDD as well. Looking forward to hear from you all.

I''ve decided that I want to use more automated tests because I''ve been intrigued by the idea of BDD. I am new to using tests, so I''m curious if there have been any writeup on using rSpec. This is one of the only ones I''ve found: http://blog.teksol.info/articles/2005/11/17/building-a-plugin-on-rspec It seems that the benefit of BDD is that it makes it

I posted a quick screencast demonstrating some BDD with RSpec yesterday: http://wincent.com/a/about/wincent/weblog/archives/2007/05/ behaviourdriven.php I''m a C/Objective-C programmer who knows a bit of Ruby, almost nothing about Rails, and in BDD I can really only claim "new but interested" status. It''s not scripted, it''s totally improvised and

> Here's the deal... I have a filesystem that I have populated by > rsyncing from a filer (over NFS) using the --link-dest option to create > incremental "snapshots" of the live data. This part is working > fine... lots of links, much fewer blocks represented. Now it is time > to migrate to > a larger filesystem and, during the rsync, the links are not being

Hi, I starting a new project, and have run into behavior I cannot replicate in irb, (i.e. outside of using rspec) when the directory? returns true, so I thought I''d ask here, in case any one has seen this badhavior. ruby-1.9.2-p136 rspec (2.5.0) rspec-core (2.5.1) rspec-expectations (2.5.0) rspec-mocks (2.5.0) When I try to run this spec: require Pathname(__FILE__).ascend { |d|

The RSpec Development Team is pleased to announce the release of RSpec-1.0.8. RSpec 1.0.6 is the "holy cow, batman, it''s been a long time since we released and there are a ton of bug fixes, patches and even new features" release. RSpec 1.0.7 and 1.0.8 deal with a regression introduced in 1.0.6 and a hiccup in releasing 1.0.7, respectively. == RSpec RSpec is a Behaviour Driven

Hello, I''m scheduled to give a rspec brown bag this Wednesday (11/22) for my company (Pivotal Computer Systems, http://www.pivotalsf.com). I did see Dave Astel''s talk as well as several of my coworkers. The developers at my workplace are experienced Agile developers. What would be some good things to focus on for this brown bag? Are there slides to presentations that would be

Hi Danny, I captured this as PR359: http://llvm.org/PR1359 Reid. On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:09:14 -0400 "Daniel Berlin" <dberlin at dberlin.org> wrote: > Hi guys, i'm not going to have time to work on this for >a month or > two, so i figured i'd post it. > > This patch > > 1. reworks the andersen's implementation to support >field