Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.
| Related articles |
|---|
| [2 earlier articles] |
| Re: rearranging code invalidates liveness info cliffc@noel.cs.rice.edu (1994-06-13) |
| rearranging code invalidates liveness info ssimmons@convex.com (1994-06-13) |
| Re: rearranging code invalidates liveness info newburn@aslan.ece.cmu.edu (1994-06-13) |
| Re: rearranging code invalidates liveness info mernst@research.microsoft.com (1994-06-15) |
| Re: rearranging code invalidates liveness info hbaker@netcom.com (1994-06-16) |
| Re: rearranging code invalidates liveness info cliffc@noel.cs.rice.edu (1994-06-16) |
| Re: rearranging code invalidates liveness info daniel@quilty.stanford.edu (1994-06-21) |
| Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
| From: | daniel@quilty.stanford.edu (Daniel Weise) |
| Keywords: | optimize, analysis |
| Organization: | Computer Systems Laboratory, Stanford University |
| References: | 94-06-070 94-06-101 |
| Date: | Tue, 21 Jun 1994 14:12:52 GMT |
mernst@research.microsoft.com writes:
|> [incremental analysis after moving or changing code]
cliffc@noel.cs.rice.edu (Cliff Click) writes:
Warning: making a small change CAN result in the "affected region"
being the whole program. ... The incremental-analysis guys are working
on a *hard* problem.
The worst case scenarios are indeed daunting. But there are at least
two reasons for hope. First, average case complexity can be much much
less than worst case complexity. Second, paying a linear cost (ie,
checking the whole program) to prevent running a super-linear analysis
is a large gain.
Daniel
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.