Question |
Raised by |
Status |
Solution |
|
Alford, Ronald Wayne |
Need
Question |
|
|
Bahety, Anand Baldeodas |
|
|
|
Bucatanschi, Dan George |
|
|
|
Chandra, Deepti Jagdish |
Need
Question |
|
Static
analysis methods generally have limitations as they don't fully consider loops,
branches and dynamic memory allocation. The method in the paper considers the
"new" operation, but still ignores branches and loops. Is the extra
information gathered from this analysis still valid and useful with the
inherent limitations in static analysis. |
Huynh, Thuan Quang |
Need
Solution |
|
|
Nguyen, Bao Ngoc |
Need
Question |
|
The
authors make an assumption that object creation is represented by "1=new
C" followed immediately by a call "1.C(..)"
to the appropriate constructor. What is the importance of this assumption?
What conditions are violated if this assumption is not made? |
Konda, Shravya Reddy |
Need
Solution |
|
In the
results of "Parameterized object sensitivity for points-to analysis for
Java" the authors mention that object sensitivity significantly improves
the precision of side-effect analysis and call graph construction, compared
to context-insensitive analysis and context-sensitive points-to analysis
models. Why is this? You may give an example to explain. |
Lee, Joonghoon |
Need
Solution |
|
The author
mentioned in the introduction section that context and data-flow insensitive
analyses are less effective than their sensitive version. Then, the author
claimed that in order to make context and data-flow insensitive analyses more
useful, context sensitivity is important. I don’t understand the logic in
this claim. It seems like they introduce VA to make A more useful. Why not
just use VA instead? The author then says that object sensitivity is a new
form of context sensitivity for flow-insensitive points-to analysis. Since it
is an insensitive analysis, why do they need sensitivity? If it needs
sensitivity, why not just call it flow-sensitive analysis? |
Liu, Liping |
Need
Solution |
|
This framework
for object-sensitive analysis is parameterized in two dimensions. What are
these two dimensions? Give a short, clear and easy to understand explanation
for each of them. Also, what is the benefit of parameterization? |
Wongsuphasawat, Krist |
Need Solution |
|
Is the
parameterization of object sensitivity presented by the authors useful only
for object-sensitive analysis, or can the technique be used to make any context-insensitive
analysis partially sensitive? |
Reisner, Elnatan
Benjamin |
Need Solution |
|
|
Schulman, Aaron David |
Need
Question |
|
In
class, we discussed two examples of basic object-oriented features for which
context-insensitive analysis produces imprecise results; they are
encapsulation and inheritance. Other common features used in OOP are
collections and maps. Give an example of a collection and a map in Java;
illustrate by example how context-insensitive analysis might produce
imprecise results for collections and maps. |
Sharara, Hossam Samy Elsai |
Need
Solution |
|
During
which phase of the software testing process would points-to analysis be
useful, and how would it be used? |
Stuckman, Jeff |
Need
Solution |
|
Describe
the primary motivation behind developing object sensitivity? |
Teoh, Alison Lui Koon |
Need
Solution |
|
How can
one improve the scalability of the analysis presented in the paper? Is it
possible to approximate the flow from the standard libraries instead of
processing the library code? |
Thakor, Shashvat Advait |
Need
Solution |
|
|
Vador, Sachin Shashikant |
Need
Question |
|
What
are the issues with using points-to analysis with Object Oriented programs,
and how does Object Sensitivity resolve these? |
Donlon, Eileen Merle |
Need
Solution |
|
Give two
examples of features of object oriented languages that are imprecisely
captured by context insensitive analysis. |
Zazworka, Nico |
Need
Solution |
|