Interprocedural Slicing Using Dependence Graphs

ACM SIGPLAN Notices

Volumn 23, Issue 7, 1988, Pages 35-46

  Horwitz, Susan ^a   Reps, Thomas ^a   Binkley, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84976844558     PISSN: 03621340     EISSN: 15581160     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1145/960116.53994     Document Type: Article

References (17)

1. Babich78. Babich, W.A. and Jazayeri, M., “The method of attributes for data flow analysis: Part IL Demand analysis,” Acta Informatica 10(3) pp. 265–272 (October 1978).
2. Banning79. Banning, J.P., “An efficient way to find the side effects of procedure calls and the aliases of variables,” pp. 29–41 in Conference Record of the Sixth ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, (San Antonio, TX, Jan. 29-31,1979), ACM, New York (1979).
3. Callahan88. Callahan, D., “The program summary graph and flow-sensitive inter-procedural data flow analysis,” Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 88 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, (Atlanta, GA, June 22-24, 1988), ACM SIGPLAN Notices, (June 1988).
4. Cooper88. Cooper, K.D. and Kennedy, K., “Interprocedural side-effect analysis in linear time,” Proceedings of the ACM SIGPLAN 88 Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation, (Atlanta, GA, June 22-24, 1988). ACM SIGPLAN Notices, (June 1988).
5. Ferrante87. Ferrante, J., Ottenstein, K., and Warren, J., “The program dependence graph and its use in optimization,” ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems 9(3) pp. 319–349 (July 1987).
6. Horwitz87. Horwitz, S., Prins, J., and Reps, T., “Integrating non-interfering versions of programs,” TR-690, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI (March 1987).
7. Horwitz88. Horwitz, S., Prins, J., and Reps, T., “Integrating non-interfering versions of programs,” pp. 133–145 in Conference Record of the Fifteenth ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, (San Diego, CA, January 13-15,1988), ACM, New York (1988).
8. Horwitz88a. Horwitz, S., Reps, T., and Binkley, D., “Interprocedural slicing using dependence graphs,” TR-756, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI (March 1988).
9. Kastens80. Kastens, U., “Ordered attribute grammars,” Acta Inf. 13(3) pp. 229– 256(1980).
10. Knuth68. Knuth, D.E., “Semantics of context-free languages,” Math. Syst. Theory 2(2) pp. 127–145 (June 1968).
11. Kou77. Kou, L.T., “On live-dead analysis for global data flow problems,” Journal of the ACM 24(3) pp. 473–483 (July 1977).
12. Kuck72. Kuck, D.J., Muraoka, Y., and Chen, S.C., “On the number of operations simultaneously executable in FORTRAN-like programs and their resulting speed-up,” IEEE Trans, on Computers C-21(12)pp. 1293–1310 (December 1972).
13. Myers81. Myers, E., “A precise inter-procedural data flow algorithm,” pp. 219– 230 in Conference Record of the Eighth ACM Symposium on Principles of Programming Languages, (Williamsburg, VA, January 26-28, 1981), ACM, New York (1981).
14. Ottenstein84. Ottenstein, K.J. and Ottenstein, L.M., “The program dependence graph in a software development environment,” Proceedings of the ACM SIGSOFTISIGPLAN Software Engineering Symposium on Practical Software Development Environments, (Pittsburgh, PA, Apr. 23-25,1984), ACM SIGPLAN Notices 19(5) pp. 177–184 (May 1984).
15. Reps88. Reps, T. and Yang, W., “The semantics of program slicing,” Tech. Rep. in preparation, Computer Sciences Department, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI (Spring 1988).
16. Waite83. Waite, W.M. and Goos, G., Compiler Construction, Springer-Verlag, New York (1983).
17. Weiser84. Weiser, M., “Program slicing,” IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering SE-10(4) pp. 352–357 (July 1984).