Abstract interpretation based static analysis parameterized by semantics

  • Patrick Cousot
Invited Talks
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1302)

Abstract

We review how the dependence upon semantics has been taken into account in abstract interpretation based program analysis and next propose to design general purpose abstract interpreters taking semantics as a parameter, either that of the program to be analyzed or that of a programming language.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    S. Abramsky and C. Hankie. An introduction to abstract interppetation, ch. 1. Ellis Horwood, 1987.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    G.L. Burn, C.L. Hankin, and S. Abramsky. Strictness analysis of higher-order functions. Sci. Comput. Prog., 7:249–278, 1986.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    P. Cousot. Semantic foundations of program analysis. In S.S. Muchnick and N.D. Jones, editors, Program Flow Analysis: Theory and Applications, ch. 10, pp. 303–342. Prentice-Hall, 1981.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. Cousot. Design of semantics by abstract interpretation, invited address. In Mathematical Foundations of Programming Semantics, Thirteenth Annual Conference (MFPS XIII), Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 1997.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    P. Cousot. Types as abstract interpretations, invited paper. In 24 th POPL, pp. 316–331, Paris, 1997. ACM Press.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Abstract interpretation: a unified lattice model for static analysis of programs by construction or approximation of fixpoints. In 4 th POPL, pp. 238–252, Los Angeles, Calif., 1977. ACM Press.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Automatic synthesis of optimal invariant assertions: mathematical foundations. In ACM Symposium on Artificial Intelligence & Programming Languages, Rochester, N.Y., SIGPLAN Notices 12(8):1–12, 1977.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Static determination of dynamic properties of recursive procedures. In E.J. Neuhold, editor, IFIP Conference on Formal Description of Programming Concepts, St-Andrews, N.B., Canada, pp. 237–277. North-Holland, 1977.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Systematic design of program analysis frameworks. In 6 th POPL, pp. 269–282, San Antonio, Texas, 1979. ACM Press.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Semantic analysis of communicating sequential processes. In J.W. de Bakker and J. van Leeuwen, editors, 7 th ICALP, LNCS 85, pp. 119–133. Springer-Verlag, 1980.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Invariance proof methods and analysis techniques for parallel programs. In A.W. Biermann, G. Guiho, and Y. Kodratoff, editors, Automatic Program Construction Techniques, ch. 12, pp. 243–271. Macmillan, 1984.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Abstract interpretation and application to logic programs. J. Logic Prog., 13(2-3):103–179, 1992. (The editor of JLP has mistakenly published the unreadable galley proof. For a correct version of this paper, see http: //vvw.dmi. ens.fr/-cousot.).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Abstract interpretation frameworks. J. Logic and Comp., 2(4):511–547, 1992.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot.Comparing the Galois connection and widening/narrowing approaches to abstract interpretation, invited paper. In M. Bruynooghe and M. Wirsing, editors, Proc. Int. Work. PLILP'92, Leuven, Belgium, LNCS 631, pages 269–295. Springer-Verlag, 1992.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Galois connection based abstract interpretations for strictness analysis, invited paper. In D. Bjørner, M. Broy, and I.V. Pottosin, editors, Proc. FMPA, Academgorodok, Novosibirsk, Russia, LNCS 735, pages 98127. Springer-Verlag, 1993.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Higher-order abstract interpretation (and application to comportment analysis generalizing strictness, termination, projection and PER analysis of functional languages), invited paper. In Proc. 1994 ICCL, Toulouse, France, pp. 95–112. IEEE Comp. Soc. Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Compositional and inductive semantic definitions in fixpoint, equational, constraint, closure-condition, rule-based and game-theoretic form, invited paper. In P. Wolper, editor, Proc. 7 th Int. Conf. CAV '95, Liège, Belgium, LNCS 939, pp. 293–308. Springer-Verlag, 1995.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    P. Cousot and R. Cousot. Formal language, grammar and set-constraint-based program analysis by abstract interpretation. In Proc. 7 th FPCA, pp. 170–181, La Jolla, Calif, 1995. ACM Press.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    S.K. Debray. Formal bases for dataflow analysis of logic programs. In G. Levi, editor, Advances in Logic Programming Theory, International Schools for Computer Scientists, section 3, pp. 115–182. Clarendon Press, 1994.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    A. Deutsch. A storeless model of aliasing and its abstraction using finite representations of right-regular equivalence relations. In Proc. 1992 ICCL, Oakland, Calif., pp. 2–13. IEEE Comp. Soc. Press, 1992.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    N. Jones, C.K. Gomard, and P. Sestoft. Partial Evaluation and Automatic Program Generation. Prentice-Hall, 1993.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    N.D. Jones and F. Nielson. Abstract interpretation: a semantics-based tool for program analysis. In S. Abramsky, D.M. Gabbay, and T.S.E. Maibaum, editors, Semantic Modelling, volume 4 of Handbook of Logic in Computer Science, ch. 5, pp. 527–636. Clarendon Press, 1995.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    A. Mycroft. Abstract Interpretation and Optimising Transformations for Applicative Programs. Ph.D. Dissertation, CST-15-81, Department of Computer Science, University of Edinburgh, Edinburg, Scotland, 1981.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    F. Nielson. Two-level semantics and abstract interpretation. TCS-Fund. St., 69:117–242, 1989.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    A. Venet. Abstract cofibred domains: Application to the alias analysis of untyped programs. In R. Cousot and D.A. Schmidt, editors, Proc. SAS'96, Aachen, Germany, LNCS 1145, pp. 368–382. Springer-Verlag, 1996.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Patrick Cousot
    • 1
  1. 1.École normale supérieure, DMIParis cedex 05France

Personalised recommendations