On Fri, Oct 17, 2008 at 1:34 PM, Ted Kremenek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Oct 16, 2008, at 10:31 PM, Zhongxing Xu wrote: > > Yeah, it seems a little confusing. But other names are worse: >> AbstractVal, too long >> AVal, like nonsense. >> ProgVal, even farther way. >> > > Yeah I agree. I also thought of "SymVal" for symbolic value, but that > conflates with our use of symbols. I also thought of SemVal, for "semantic" > value. This one is kind of nice because it reflects that we are reasoning > about "semantics" as opposed to "syntax". > What about "SVal"? "S" can represent many meanings: semantic value, symbolic value, static-analysis value. And it's shorter.
_______________________________________________ cfe-commits mailing list [email protected] http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
