STATOR:Establishing code-base

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].

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
  • May slow down implementation of program analyses, symbolic manipulations of data structures may require more programming effort then in languages like OCaml or F#.

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.
  • It is a modern language built on top of huge and established .NET platform.

• 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.
  • Portability mostly depends on qualities of Mono.

OCaml

• pros
  • May provide faster implementation of program analyses, because symbolic manipulations of particular data structures (like syntax trees, expressions, BDD,...)
  • OCaml development environments are still immature and primitive

• cons
  • Not many people knows it, but the situation improves.

C++

• pros
  • a

• cons
  • a