Improving program analyses by structure untupling

Journal of Logic Programming

Volumn 43, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 251-263

  Codish, Michael ^a   Marriott, Kim ^b   Taboch, Cohavit ^a  

^a BEN GURION UNIVERSITY OF THE NEGEV   (Israel)

^b MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DATA STRUCTURES;

STRUCTURE UNTUPLING;

LOGIC PROGRAMMING;

EID: 0033896573     PISSN: 07431066     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0743-1066(99)00079-5     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. R. Bagnara, Data-flow analysis for constraint logic-based languages, Ph.D. thesis, University of Pisa, 1997.
2. M. Codish, D. Dams, E. Yardeni, Bottom-up abstract interpretation of logic programs, Journal of Theoretical Computer Science 124 (1994) 93-125.
3. M. Codish, C. Taboch, A semantic basis for termination analysis of logic programs, Journal of Logic Programming 41 (1999) 103-123.
4. A. Cortesi, G. Filé, W. Winsborough, Prop revisited: prepositional formula as abstract domain for groundness analysis, in: Proceedings of the Sixth Annual IEEE Symposium, Logic in Computer Science, IEEE Computer Society Press, Los Alamitos, California, 1991, pp. 322-32.
5. A. Cortesi, G. Filé, W. Winsborough, Optimal groundness analysis using prepositional logic, Journal of Logic Programming 27 (2) (1996) 137-167.
6. A. Cortesi, B. Le Charlier, P. Van Hentenryck, Conceptual and software support for abstract domain design: generic structural domain and open product, Technical Report CS-93-13, Brown University, Department of Computer Science, 1993, Available from ftp://ftp.cs.brown.edu/pub/techreports/93/ cs93-13.ps.Z.
7. A. Cortesi, B. Le Charlier, P. Van Hentenryck, Combinations of abstract domains for logic programming, in: ACM Proceedings of the 21st Annual ACM SIGACT-SIGPLAN Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, ACM Press, New York, 1994, pp. 227-239.
8. P. Cousot, R. Cousot, Abstract interpretation: A unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of fixpoints, in: Proceedings of the Fourth ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, January 1977, pp. 238-252.
9. M. Falaschi, G. Levi, M. Martelli, C. Palamidessi, Declarative modeling of the operational behavior of logic languages, Theoretical Computer Science 69 (3) (1989) 289-318.
10. M.C. Fitting, A. Kripke-Kleene, Semantics for logic programming, Journal of Logic Programming 4 (1985) 295-312.
11. B. Le Charlier, P. Van Hentenryck, Experimental evaluation of a generic abstract interpretation algorithm for prolog, ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems (TOPLAS) 16 (1) (1994) 35-101.
12. J. Lloyd, Foundations of Logic Programming, Springer, Berlin, 1987.
13. K. Marriott, L. Naish, J. Lassez, Most specific logic programs, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 1 (2) (1990).
14. K. Marriott, L. Naish, J.-L. Lassez, Most specific logic programs, in: R.A. Kowalski, K.A. Bowen, (Eds.), Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference and Symposium on Logic Programming, Seatle, ALP, IEEE, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1988, pp. 909-923.
15. K. Marriott, H. Søndergaard, Bottom-up dataflow analysis of normal logic programs, The Journal of Logic Programming 13 (2 and 3) (1992) 181-204.
16. K. Marriott, H. Søndergaard, Precise and efficient groundness analysis for logic programs, ACM Letters on Programming Languages and Systems 2 (1-4) (1993) 181-196.
17. T. Sato, H. Tamaki, Enumeration of success patterns in logic programs, Theoretical Computer Science 34 (1984) 227-240.
18. P. Van Hentenryck, A. Cortesi, B. Le Charlier, Evaluation of the domain PROP, Journal of Logic Programming 23 (3) (1995) 237-278.