From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5d6f85246966eb2e X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: JP Thornley Subject: WCET Analysis (was For GNAT People) Date: 1996/08/03 Message-ID: <719669884wnr@diphi.demon.co.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 172169320 x-nntp-posting-host: diphi.demon.co.uk references: <31F5FF33.167EB0E7@pisa.intecs.it> <320021F4.3A59@ee.ubc.ca> x-mail2news-path: relay-4.mail.demon.net!post.demon.co.uk!diphi.demon.co.uk organization: None reply-to: jpt@diphi.demon.co.uk newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-08-03T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Greg Bond writes (talking about analysing code for worst case execution times): > Any approach I'm familiar with analyzes RTL, or byte code i.e. > the result of compiling (completed) code. How do these approaches deal with problems such as:- semantically infeasible paths, maximum loop iterations, etc. where you need information that isn't provided by the typical compiler? I've used one tool that takes a rather crude approach to these, but would be interested in experience of other tools. Phil Thornley -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ | JP Thornley EMail jpt@diphi.demon.co.uk | ------------------------------------------------------------------------