On Oct 16, 2008, at 10:38 PM, Zhongxing Xu wrote:
On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Ted Kremenek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
On Oct 16, 2008, at 10:31 PM, Zhongxing Xu wrote:
Yeah, it seems a little confusing. But other names are worse:
AbstractVal, too long
AVal, like nonsense.
ProgVal, even farther way.
Yeah I agree. I also thought of "SymVal" for symbolic value, but
that conflates with our use of symbols. I also thought of SemVal,
for "semantic" value. This one is kind of nice because it reflects
that we are reasoning about "semantics" as opposed to "syntax".
What about "SVal"? "S" can represent many meanings: semantic value,
symbolic value, static-analysis value. And it's shorter.
Sounds good! For a second I thought it conflicted with something from
Lisp, but I was thinking of "s expressions." It's also the same
number of characters as RVal._______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
