[aosd-discuss] the pcflow pointcut

[Eric Bodden]

Hi.

As far as I know, pcflow was meant to be a predictive (i.e. static!)
approximation of cflow, the idea being that it can be statically
evaluated and hence may be more efficient (please correct me if I am
wrong). So for a pcflow pointcut to be implemented corrrectly, if
cflow(p) matches a joinpoint j, then pcflow(p) must match at the
joinpoint shadow of j.

If my definition above is correct and complete (where was this
originally coming from again?) then I believe that the concept of
pcflow has actually become somewhat obsolete because there exist
static optimization techniques that implement exactly that predictive
approximation as optimization for the "real" cflow pointcut:

Avgustinov, P., Christensen, A. S., Hendren, L., Kuzins, S., Lhoták,
J., Lhoták, O., de Moor, O., Sereni, D., Sittampalam, G., and Tibble,
J. 2005. Optimising AspectJ. In Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGPLAN
Conference on Programming Language Design and Implementation (Chicago,
IL, USA, June 12 - 15, 2005). PLDI '05. ACM Press, New York, NY,
117-128. DOI= http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1065010.1065026

Hope that helps,
Eric

On 14/09/2007, dm_alhad at alcor.concordia.ca <dm_alhad at alcor.concordia.ca> wrote:
>
> Hi,
> do you know what advantages the pcflow (predicted control flow) pointcut have
> over the cflow (control flow) pointcut?
> and are there join points that match one of them but don't match the other?
> More precisely, if we have one pointcut p and we write pcflow(p) and cflow(p),
> are they have different join points satisfying them or similar ones?
> Finally, do u thing the pcflow can be programmed or not?
> Dima
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> discuss mailing list    -    discuss at aosd.net
>
> To unsubscribe and change options, go to:
> http://aosd.net/mailman/listinfo/discuss_aosd.net
>
> Check out the AOSD.net Wiki: http://aosd.net/wiki
>


-- 
Eric Bodden
Sable Research Group
McGill University, Montréal, Canada