论文信息 - Comparing type-based and proof-directed decompilation

Comparing type-based and proof-directed decompilation

In the past couple of years interest in decompilation has widened from its initial concentration on reconstruction of control flow into well-founded-in-theory methods to reconstruct type information. A. Mycroft (1999) described Type-Based Decompilation and S. Katsumata and A. Ohori (2001) described Proof-Directed Decompilation. The article summarises the two approaches and identifies their commonality, strengths and weaknesses; it concludes by suggesting how they may be integrated.

Alan Mycroft | Shin-ya Katsumata | Atsushi Ohori

[1] Lunjin Lu,et al. Polymorphic Type Analysis in Logic Programs by Abstract Intepretation , 1998, J. Log. Program..

[2] Lunjin Lu,et al. Type analysis of logic programs in the presence of type definitions , 1995, PEPM '95.

[3] Atsushi Ohori,et al. The Logical Abstract Machine: A Curry-Howard Isomorphism for Machine Code , 1999, Fuji International Symposium on Functional and Logic Programming.

[4] Cristina Cifuentes,et al. Reverse compilation techniques , 1994 .

[5] Shin-ya Katsumata,et al. Proof-Directed De-compilation of Low-Level Code , 2001, ESOP.

[6] Mark N. Wegman,et al. Efficiently computing static single assignment form and the control dependence graph , 1991, TOPL.

[7] Alan Mycroft,et al. Type-Based Decompilation (or Program Reconstruction via Type Reconstruction) , 1999, ESOP.

[8] Andrew W. Appel,et al. SSA is functional programming , 1998, SIGP.