SOOT

By Joe Palmer

Information taken from http://www.sable.mcgill.ca/soot/tutorial/pldi03/tutorial.pdf

General Overview
Developed by Sable Research Group out
of McGill University in 1996-1997
Used to optimize Java Bytecode
4 source languages
4 intermediate representations used
Sources Languages
Primarily takes Java Source as its input
Can also take:
SML
Scheme
Eiffel
I.R.s
Baf:
Streamlined, stack-based representation of bytecode
Abstracts type dependent variations of expressions into a single expression
Jimple:
Stack-less, typed, 3-Address representation of bytecode
Mix between java source and java bytecode
Linearization of a single expression into 3 separate statements
Only refers to 3 local vars or conts at once
Only 15 jimple instructions are used
Compared to 200 possible instructions in java bytecode!
Shimple:
SSA-form version of Jimple main IR
Each local var has a single static point of definition (never reassign) used!!
Uses Phi-Nodes for control flow
Grimp:
Similar to Jimple but allows trees of expressions together with a
representation of a new operator
Expressions are aggregated
Phases of the Optimization
Analysis
Tested using 8 SPECjvm98 benchmarks running on JDK
1.2
Showed 8% improvement when optimized bytecode is run using
an interpreter
21% improvement when optimized bytecode is run using a JIT
compiler
Used in research with traditional compiler analyses,
analyses for software engineering, analysis for
distributed programs, and software verification
Ptolemy Project
Bandera
Canvas Project
Strengths and Future
Enhancements
Used as a common infrastructure with which
researchers could compare common analyses
Enhancements coming:
Attribute management
Attribute legends
Improved visual attributes in source
Interactive CFGs
Growable graphical callgraph
Making conversion from Java to Jimple more stable and
complete