S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. Technical Report BL0113590-990302-04, Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies, 1999.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....dynamic types to statically typed languages: types and capabilities for the statically typed elements are known at compile time, while the dynamicallytyped elements are guarded by run time checks. Our type system is inspired by common C usage, and includes support for physical type equivalence [8] and special sequence pointers for accessing arrays. The second contribution of the paper is a simple yet e ective type inference algorithm that can translate ordinary C programs into CCured mostly automatically and in a matter of seconds even for 30,000line programs. We have used this inference ....

....to the language. In contrast our system was designed to handle memory reads and writes, allows DYNAMIC values to be manipulated (e.g. via pointer arithmetic) without checking their tags, and uses DYNAMIC types to guarantee the safety of code that cannot be statically veri ed. Chandra and Reps [8] present a method for physical type checking of C programs based on structure layout in the presence of casts. Their inference method can reason about casts between various structure types by considering the physical layout of memory. Our example in Section 2 would fail to type check in their ....

S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, volume 24.5 of Software Engeneering Notes (SEN), pages 66-75. ACM Press, Sept. 6 1999.

....Our system has uncovered many serious new errors not found by code inspections and other tools. Future work includes exploration of context sensitivity, and a more accurate treatment of structs that goes beyond fieldbased and field independent (e.g. modeling of the layout of C structs in memory[7], so that an expression x:f is treated as an offset f from some base object x) Acknowledgements: Thanks to Satish Chandra and Jeff Foster for access to their respective systems and bench pointer points to real user process assignments variables relations time time size in core loaded in ....

S. Chandra and T. Reps, "Physical Type Checking for C" PASTE, 1999.

.... y p but we do not have y p x p, so our deductions are unsound. We leave as future work the solution to these problems. We believe that the best solution will be to combine techniques that attempt to recover the semantic behavior of casts with conservative alias analysis for ill behaved casts [12, 36, 37]. 4.3 Variable Argument Functions C allows functions to have a variable number of arguments, through the varargs language feature. However, there is no obvious way of specifying constraints on the individual varargs: even their type is not fixed. For example, in the expression sprintf(s, s , ....

Satish Chandra and Thomas W. Reps. "Physical Type Checking for C." In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN /SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, Toulouse, France, September 1999. , pages 66--75.

.... Lackwit allows one to ask queries like Which functions could directly access the representation of component X of variable Y Other work based on type inferencing includes physical type checking of C , which is a stronger form of type checking for type casts involving pointers to structures [4], and the analysis of Fortran programs in order to find new type signatures for subroutines [20] Type based analysis of COBOL, for the purpose of year 2000 analysis, is presented by [9, 17] both provide a type inference algorithm that splits aggregate structures into smaller units based on ....

S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. In Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, PASTE'99, pages 66--75. ACM Press, September 1999. SIGSOFT Software Engineering Notes 24(5).

....misuses of type casts based on the use of static analysis. Work on static analysis that can be applied to checking for out of bounds array accesses includes [12 16] Algorithms for points to analysis that distinguish among fields of structures [17, 18] and for so called physical type checking [19] can also be used to perform static safety checks. However, most of the work based on static analysis cited above has used flow insensitive techniques, which is likely to cause an enormous number of warnings of possible misuses to be generated when applied to safety checking of real life C ....

S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. In Proc. of PASTE '99: SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis for Softw. Tools and Eng., pages 66--75, New York, NY, 1999. ACM.

....type systems to C has been investigated by a number of groups, including [8, 18, 13, 17] most of this work has discussed how to apply parametric polymorphism to C. Algorithms for points to analysis that distinguish among fields of structures [21, 25] and for so called physical type checking [5] can also be used to perform static safety checks. However, most of the work based on static analysis cited above has used flow insensitive techniques, which is likely to cause an enormous number of warnings of possible misuses to be generated when applied to safety checking of real life C ....

S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. In Proc. of PASTE '99: SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis for Softw. Tools and Eng., pages 66--75, New York, NY, 1999. ACM.

....typechecking system for C (which is based only on variables declared types) Our contributions are as follows: ffl We give an inference based algorithm to perform such type checking for C programs. An implementation of the algorithm that uses an off the shelf constraint solver is described in [3]. ffl In previous work, we had introduced a notion of physical subtyping between struct types. However, this work did not handle pointer fields inside structures. In this paper, we introduce a way to handle subtyping in the presence of pointer fields. Outline. The remainder of the paper is ....

....certain problems with pointers that hinder our approach. Section 4 presents the actual algorithm and shows how it solves these problems. Section 5 discusses related work. Due to space constraints, much detail has been left out from this paper, but is covered in a more complete technical report [3]. 2 Preliminaries In this section, we define what we mean by physical type safety, and review the notion of physical subtyping, which was introduced in [15] It is useful to define a number of auxiliary functions: stype(e) is the compiler assigned type of a C expression e; sizeof (t) is ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Satish Chandra and Thomas Reps. Physical type checking for C. Technical Report BL0113590-990302-04, Lucent Technologies, Bell Laboratories, March 1999. Available at http://www.bell-labs.com/~schandra/pubs/checking-tr.ps.

No context found.

S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. Technical Report BL0113590-990302-04, Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies, 1999.

No context found.

S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. In Proc. ACM Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, pages 66--75, 1999.

No context found.

S. Chandra and T.W. Reps. Physical type checking for C. In Workshop on Program Analysis For Software Tools and Engineering, pages 66 -- 75. ACM SIGPLAN - SIGSOFT, September 1999.

No context found.

S. Chandra and T.W. Reps. Physical type checking for C. In ACM SIGPLAN - SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis For Software Tools and Engineering (PASTE'99), pages 66 -- 75. ACM Press, September 1999.

No context found.

Satish Chandra and Thomas W. Reps. Physical Type Checking for C. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN/SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, pages 66--75, Toulouse, France, September 1999.

No context found.

Satish Chandra and Thomas W. Reps. Physical type checking for c. In Workshop on Program Analysis For Software Tools and Engineering, pages 66--75, 1999.

No context found.

Satish Chandra and Tom Reps. Physical type checking for C. In ACM Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, pages 66--75, Toulouse, France, September 1999.

No context found.

Satish Chandra and Thomas Reps. Physical type checking for C. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, volume 24.5 of Software Engeneering Notes (SEN), pages 66--75. ACM Press, September 6 1999.

No context found.

S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, volume 24.5 of Software Engeneering Notes (SEN), pages 66--75. ACM Press, Sept. 6 1999.

No context found.

S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. Technical Report BL0113590-990302-04, Bell Laboratories, Lucent Technologies, 1999.

No context found.

S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. In Proc. ACM Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, pages 66--75, 1999.

No context found.

S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, volume 24.5 of Software Engeneering Notes (SEN), pages 66--75. ACM Press, Sept. 6 1999.

No context found.

S. Chandra and T. Reps. Physical type checking for C. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN-SIGSOFT Workshop on Program Analysis for Software Tools and Engineering, volume 24.5 of Software Engeneering Notes (SEN), pages 66--75. ACM Press, Sept. 6 1999.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC