Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
David C. Sehr
dblp:51/2483
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2001
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Systems, architecture and hardware · 2 · 1 first-authorSoftware engineering, systems software and programming languages · 1
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Software engineering, system software, and programming languages
1 paper |
Compilers and program optimization · 67% Program analysis · 33% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Compilers and program optimization
compiler analysis |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | On the Importance of Points-to Analysis and Other Memory Disambiguation Methods for C Programs · PLDI 2001 |
Compilers and program optimization › dependence analysis
memory disambiguation |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | On the Importance of Points-to Analysis and Other Memory Disambiguation Methods for C Programs · PLDI 2001 |
Program analysis › static analysis
pointer analysis |
0.0 | 1 | 2001 | On the Importance of Points-to Analysis and Other Memory Disambiguation Methods for C Programs · PLDI 2001 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
points-to analysis · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2001 | On the Importance of Points-to Analysis and Other Memory Disambiguation Methods for C ProgramsabstractIn this paper, we evaluate the benefits achievable from pointer analysis and other memory disambiguation techniques for C/C++ programs, using the framework of the production compiler for the Intel ® Itanium TM processor. Most of the prior work on memory disambiguation has primarily focused on pointer analysis, and either presents only static estimates of the accuracy of the analysis (such as average points-to set size), or provides performance data in the context of certain individual optiraizations. In contrast, our study is based on a complete memory disambiguation framework that uses a whole set of techniques including pointer analysis. Further, it presents how various compiler analyses and optimizations interact with the memory disambiguator, evaluates how much they benefit from disambiguation, and measures the eventual impact on the performance of the program. The paper also analyzes the types of disambiguation queries that are typically received by the disambiguator, which disambiguation techniques prove most effective in resolving them, and what type of queries prove difficult to be resolved. The study is based on empirical data collected for the SPEC CINT2000 C/C++ programs, running on the Itanium processor. 1. Rakesh Ghiya, Daniel M. Lavery, David C. Sehr |
PLDI | 3 |
| 1991 | Fortran-Style Transformations for Functional Programs
David C. Sehr, Laxmikant V. Kalé, David A. Padua |
ICPP (2) | 1 |
| 1988 | OR parallel execution of Prolog programs with side effects
Laxmikant V. Kalé, David A. Padua, David C. Sehr |
J. Supercomput. | 3 |