You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Right now we annotate each method type-signature with capabilities used.
I think the method annotations could be inferred by constructing a method call graph for each class, and then generating constraints - if method M1 calls M2, then capabilities_used(M1) is a superset of capabilities_used(M2).
Then you solve the constraints to get the method annotations. There’s potentially a quadratic number of constraints (with respect to number of methods) but in theory doable. If we tried to infer parameter annotations as well, this call-graph based approach would most likely lead to far too many constraints and likely wouldn’t scale.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Right now we annotate each method type-signature with capabilities used.
I think the method annotations could be inferred by constructing a method call graph for each class, and then generating constraints - if method M1 calls M2, then capabilities_used(M1) is a superset of capabilities_used(M2).
Then you solve the constraints to get the method annotations. There’s potentially a quadratic number of constraints (with respect to number of methods) but in theory doable. If we tried to infer parameter annotations as well, this call-graph based approach would most likely lead to far too many constraints and likely wouldn’t scale.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: