skip to main content
10.1145/996841.996867acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagespldiConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article

The set constraint/CFL reachability connection in practice

Published:09 June 2004Publication History

ABSTRACT

Many program analyses can be reduced to graph reachability problems involving a limited form of context-free language reachability called Dyck-CFL reachability. We show a new reduction from Dyck-CFL reachability to set constraints that can be used in practice to solve these problems. Our reduction is much simpler than the general reduction from context-free language reachability to set constraints. We have implemented our reduction on top of a set constraints toolkit and tested its performance on a substantial polymorphic flow analysis application.

References

  1. A. Aiken and E. L. Wimmers. Solving Systems of Set Constraints. In Proceedings, Seventh Annual IEEE Symposium on Logic in Computer Science, pages 329--340, Santa Cruz, California, June 1992.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. V. Choppella and C. T. Haynes. Source-tracking Unification. In F. Baader, editor, Automated Deduction - CADE-19, 19th International Conference on Automated Deduction Miami Beach, FL, USA, July 28 - August 2, 2003, Proceedings, volume 2741 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 458--472. Springer, 2003.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. M. Das, B. Liblit, M. Fähndrich, and J. Rehof. Estimating the Impact of Scalable Pointer Analysis on Optimization. In SAS '01: The 8th International Static Analysis Symposium, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Paris, France, July 16--18 2001. Springer-Verlag.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. M. Fähndrich, J. S. Foster, Z. Su, and A. Aiken. Partial Online Cycle Elimination in Inclusion Constraint Graphs. In Proceedings of the 1998 ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 85--96, Montreal, Canada, June 1998.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. J. S. Foster, M. Fähndrich, and A. Aiken. A Theory of Type Qualifiers. In Proceedings of the 1999 ACM SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 192--203, Atlanta, Georgia, May 1999.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. N. Heintze. Set Based Program Analysis. PhD dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, Department of Computer Science, Oct. 1992.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. N. Heintze and O. Tardieu. Demand-driven Pointer Analysis. In SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 24--34, 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. N. Heintze and O. Tardieu. Ultra-fast Aliasing Analysis Using CLA: A Million Lines of C Code in a Second. In SIGPLAN Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, pages 254--263, 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. S. Horwitz, T. Reps, and D. Binkley. Interprocedural Slicing Using Dependence Graphs. ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems, 12(1):26--60, 1990.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. S. Horwitz, T. Reps, and M. Sagiv. Demand Interprocedural Dataflow Analysis. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGSOFT Symposium on Foundations of Software Engineering, pages 104--115. ACM Press, 1995.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. J. Kodumal. BANSHEE: A Toolkit for Building Constraint-Based Analyses. http://bane.cs.berkeley.edu/banshee.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. D. Melski and T. Reps. Interconvertbility of Set Constraints and Context-Free Language Reachability. In Proceedings of the 1997 ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Partial Evaluation and Semantics-based Program Manipulation, pages 74--89. ACM Press, 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. D. Melski and T. Reps. Interconvertibility of a Class of Set Constraints and Context-Free-Language Reachability. Theoretical Computer Science, 248:29--98, 2000.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. C. Mossin. Flow Analysis of Typed Higher-Order Programs. PhD thesis, DIKU, Department of Computer Science, University of Copenhagen, 1996.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. J. Rehof and M. Fähndrich. Type-Based Flow Analysis: From Polymorphic Subtyping to CFL-Reachability. In Proceedings of the 28th Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 54--66, London, United Kingdom, Jan. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. T. Reps. Shape Analysis as a Generalized Path Problem. In Proceedings of the 1995 ACM SIGPLAN Symposium on Partial Evaluation and Semantics-based Program manipulation, pages 1--11. ACM Press, 1995.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. T. Reps. Program Analysis Via Graph Reachability. In Information and Software Technology, pages 701--726, 1998.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. T. Reps, S. Horwitz, and M. Sagiv. Precise Interprocedural Dataflow Analysis via Graph Reachability. In Proceedings of the 22nd Annual ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 49--61, San Francisco, California, Jan. 1995.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. A. Rountev and S. Chandra. Off-line Variable Substitution for Scaling Points-to Analysis. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2000 conference on Programming language design and implementation, pages 47--56. ACM Press, 2000.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. U. Shankar, K. Talwar, J. S. Foster, and D. Wagner. Detecting Format String Vulnerabilities with Type Qualifiers. In Proceedings of the 10th Usenix Security Symposium, Washington, D.C., Aug. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Z. Su, M. Fähndrich, and A. Aiken. Projection Merging: Reducing Redundancies in Inclusion Constraint Graphs. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM SIGPLAN-SIGACT Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, pages 81--95. ACM Press, 2000.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. The set constraint/CFL reachability connection in practice

              Recommendations

              Comments

              Login options

              Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

              Sign in
              • Published in

                cover image ACM Conferences
                PLDI '04: Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 2004 conference on Programming language design and implementation
                June 2004
                310 pages
                ISBN:1581138075
                DOI:10.1145/996841
                • cover image ACM SIGPLAN Notices
                  ACM SIGPLAN Notices  Volume 39, Issue 6
                  PLDI '04
                  May 2004
                  299 pages
                  ISSN:0362-1340
                  EISSN:1558-1160
                  DOI:10.1145/996893
                  Issue’s Table of Contents

                Copyright © 2004 ACM

                Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

                Publisher

                Association for Computing Machinery

                New York, NY, United States

                Publication History

                • Published: 9 June 2004

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • Article

                Acceptance Rates

                Overall Acceptance Rate406of2,067submissions,20%

                Upcoming Conference

                PLDI '24

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader