On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Ted Kremenek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Nov 5, 2008, at 5:24 PM, Zhongxing Xu wrote: > > Thoughts? >> >> Ted > > > Sounds reasonable! I remember that there was RegionExtent code. Maybe we > should pick it up. > > > Right; I scribbled some code for that, but never really implemented > anything real. I think we just need to establish a "taxonomy" of > extents/sizes, and decide if we need a variant like RegionExtent or can just > use SVals. > I think we can use SVals for now and extend to a RegionExtent class when necessary. Another thing to discuss: what units shall we choose for representing extent? In bits, bytes, or element numbers? For array bounds checking, element numbers are the most direct. What other clients care about the extents? > > Do you think using the GDM to associate regions with their extents is the > right approach? > > > Absolutely. That's the perfect place to put any other data that won't fit > into the current fields of Store/Environment/GRState. Such uses of the GDM, > however, should probably be handled by each specific implementation of > StoreManager. This nicely abstracts away the details from clients, and > doesn't place artificial requirements on the particular implementation of a > StoreManager. >
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
