c code refactoring or optimizing

[Dennis Yurichev]

Hi.
How can I find some ready tool or how can I find a proper way to
develope tool which will convert such code:

if (a>b+2+2)
{
f1();
f2(a*3*2);
} else
{
f1();
f3(a);
}

To something like that:

f1();
if (a>b+4)
f2(a*6)
else
f3(a);

In another words, this is what is done by modern compiler at
optimization phase, right? But I need to have C-source at the input
and C-source at the output.
Could please anyone point me to any ideas or ready works.

[Kenneth Brody]

Re: c code refactoring or optimizing

Dennis Yurichev wrote:

>
Hi.
How can I find some ready tool or how can I find a proper way to
develope tool which will convert such code:
>
if (a>b+2+2)
{
f1();
f2(a*3*2);
} else
{
f1();
f3(a);
}
>
To something like that:
>
f1();
if (a>b+4)
f2(a*6)
else
f3(a);
>
In another words, this is what is done by modern compiler at
optimization phase, right? But I need to have C-source at the input
and C-source at the output.
Could please anyone point me to any ideas or ready works.

It can be done only if you can prove that f1() has no side effects
which affect a or b. (And, if a and b aren't simple variables, that
accessing them has no effect on f1() either.)

Yes, the compiler will probably take "a*3*2" and generate "multiply
a times 6" in the output. However, whether it will move the call to
f1(), even if it can prove the "no side effects", is up to the
writers of the compiler, and may not happen on any compiler.

--
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
| Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | #include |
| kenbrody/at\spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | <std_disclaimer .h|
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------+
Don't e-mail me at: <mailto:ThisIsA SpamTrap@gmail. com>

[Dennis Yurichev]

Re: c code refactoring or optimizing

On 27 ÍÁÒ, 21:46, Kenneth Brody <kenbr...@spamc op.netwrote:

Dennis Yurichev wrote:
>

Hi.
How can I find some ready tool or how can I find a proper way to
develope tool which will convert such code:

>

if (a>b+2+2)
{
f1();
f2(a*3*2);
} else
{
f1();
f3(a);
}

>

To something like that:

>

f1();
if (a>b+4)
f2(a*6)
else
f3(a);

>

In another words, this is what is done by modern compiler at
optimization phase, right? But I need to have C-source at the input
and C-source at the output.
Could please anyone point me to any ideas or ready works.

>
It can be done only if you can prove that f1() has no side effects
which affect a or b. (And, if a and b aren't simple variables, that
accessing them has no effect on f1() either.)

Yes, I forgot to mention that a and b are local variables that are not
in scope inside of f1();

[Malcolm McLean]

Re: c code refactoring or optimizing


"Kenneth Brody" <kenbrody@spamc op.netwrote

Dennis Yurichev wrote:

>>
>Hi.
>How can I find some ready tool or how can I find a proper way to
>develope tool which will convert such code:
>>
>if (a>b+2+2)
>{
> f1();
> f2(a*3*2);
>} else
>{
> f1();
> f3(a);
>}
>>
>To something like that:
>>
>f1();
>if (a>b+4)
> f2(a*6)
>else
> f3(a);
>>
>In another words, this is what is done by modern compiler at
>optimization phase, right? But I need to have C-source at the input
>and C-source at the output.
>Could please anyone point me to any ideas or ready works.

>
It can be done only if you can prove that f1() has no side effects
which affect a or b. (And, if a and b aren't simple variables, that
accessing them has no effect on f1() either.)
>
Yes, the compiler will probably take "a*3*2" and generate "multiply
a times 6" in the output. However, whether it will move the call to
f1(), even if it can prove the "no side effects", is up to the
writers of the compiler, and may not happen on any compiler.
>

The optimisation would save only a few bytes of code space to set up and
call the function twice. It wouldn't reduce the number of calls. It is
unlikely that this optimisation would be worthwhile.

[Flash Gordon]

Re: c code refactoring or optimizing

Dennis Yurichev wrote, On 27/03/07 19:51:

On 27 ÍÁÒ, 21:46, Kenneth Brody <kenbr...@spamc op.netwrote:

>Dennis Yurichev wrote:

<snip>

>>In another words, this is what is done by modern compiler at
>>optimizatio n phase, right? But I need to have C-source at the input
>>and C-source at the output.
>>Could please anyone point me to any ideas or ready works.

>It can be done only if you can prove that f1() has no side effects
>which affect a or b. (And, if a and b aren't simple variables, that
>accessing them has no effect on f1() either.)

>
Yes, I forgot to mention that a and b are local variables that are not
in scope inside of f1();

Basically you will have to implement a significant amount of a compiler
and optimiser to solve this problem (you won't need to generate
assembler/machine-code, but you need to go far enough that you have a
representation you can optimise). Or you could write a backend to gcc
which emits C code, although how readable it would be is another matter.
--
Flash Gordon

[Eric Sosman]

Re: c code refactoring or optimizing

Dennis Yurichev wrote On 03/27/07 13:10,:

Hi.
How can I find some ready tool or how can I find a proper way to
develope tool which will convert such code:
>
if (a>b+2+2)
{
f1();
f2(a*3*2);
} else
{
f1();
f3(a);
}
>
To something like that:
>
f1();
if (a>b+4)
f2(a*6)
else
f3(a);
>
In another words, this is what is done by modern compiler at
optimization phase, right? But I need to have C-source at the input
and C-source at the output.
Could please anyone point me to any ideas or ready works.

As others have said, you'll need most of a compiler's machinery
to get started at this. If you want to build such a tool, you should
probably begin with an open-source C compiler and start modifying it.

But why do you want to do this? I can imagine a lot of plausible
transformations that would be entirely valid on the machine at hand,
but would completely ruin the code for any other machine. For instance

if (CHAR_MIN < 0)
printf ("Signed char\n");
else
printf ("Unsigned char\n");

.... would not be "improved" by expanding CHAR_MIN, evaluating the
constant expression, eliminating the test, and replacing the whole
thing with one or the other of the printf() calls! Similarly, the
messy expression in

char buff[1+(sizeof(int)* CHAR_BIT+2)/3+1];
sprintf (buff, "%d", count);

.... should probably be left as it is and not "economized ." And yet,
if you simply ignore preprocessor macros you may lack enough information
to tell whether a transformation is useful, or even possible. It seems
you'd need a front-end that would "sort of" preprocess the source code
but "sort of" not do so. Tricky.

What problem are you trying to solve by applying such a tool?

--
Eric.Sosman@sun .com

[Ira Baxter]

Re: c code refactoring or optimizing

"Dennis Yurichev" <Dennis.Yuriche v@gmail.comwrot e in message
news:1175015416 .964426.307210@ b75g2000hsg.goo glegroups.com.. .

Hi.
How can I find some ready tool or how can I find a proper way to
develope tool which will convert such code:
>
if (a>b+2+2)
{
f1();
f2(a*3*2);
} else
{
f1();
f3(a);
}
>
To something like that:
>
f1();
if (a>b+4)
f2(a*6)
else
f3(a);
>
In another words, this is what is done by modern compiler at
optimization phase, right? But I need to have C-source at the input
and C-source at the output.
Could please anyone point me to any ideas or ready works.

The DMS Software Reengineering Toolkit can carry out these
kind of transformations . It provides a full C parser and symbol
table and an anti-parser to convert internal trees back into
legal source source. The transformations operate on internal
ASTs. You have to provide the transforms
and analyzers, but there is a lot of machinery for specifying
the transforms, and there is considerable flow analysis
machinery for collecting and propagating facts.
DMS has been used on very large C source code bases.

See http://www.semanticdesigns.com/Produ...CFrontEnd.html

--
Ira Baxter, CTO

https://www.semanticdesigns.com