STATOR:Establishing code-base
Revision as of 16:09, 25 July 2014 by Marek Trtik (talk | contribs)
Here we list pros and cons of all our approaches towards establishing STATOR's code-base. All pros/cons are listed in the order from the most important to the least one. We further assign for all listed pros/cons a global "importance level", which is a number in [1,...,10].
Contents
Main implementation language
Java
- pros
- Many students know it
- Huge standard library
- There is of lot of program analyses related code written in Java. E.g. CPAchecker and Stanse already have established interfaces to CFG representations of programs.
- cons
F#
- pros
- May provide faster implementation of program analyses, because symbolic manipulations of particular data structures (like syntax trees, expressions, BDD,...)
- We can move to Windows and thus develop STATOR in Visual Studio.
- cons
- Not many people knows it, but the situation improves.
- Development in Mono can be less comfortable. Also support of F# in Mono known to us yet. Similarly, state of standard library is not know.
OCaml
- pros
- May provide faster implementation of program analyses, because symbolic manipulations of particular data structures (like syntax trees, expressions, BDD,...)
- cons
- Not many people knows it, but the situation improves.
C++
- pros
- a
- cons
- a
Java
- pros
- a
- cons
- a