Re: Tags missing from Jimple statements

[Ondrej Lhotak <olhotak@sable.mcgill.ca>]

On Wed, Oct 09, 2002 at 06:15:27PM +0200, roman wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm using the '--annotation LineNumber' option (and also '--annotation
> ByteCodeOffset', in a modified version of Soot) and I noticed that some
> Jimple statements don't have their tags.
> 
> I suspected it is because certain optimizations to the Jimple body create
> new statements without updating their tags, so I tried using the option '-p
> jb verbatim', but still some statements are missing their tags.
> I noticed that this especially occurs for the very first statements, which
> copy values from method parameters to local values.

Are the tags for these identity statements created in the first place?
Since identity statements do not correspond to any actual bytecode (they
are only present in Jimple), I don't see how their line number and
bytecode offset should be defined.

> Trying to find the source of the problem I went to Soot's source-code and
> noticed that the cloning
> methods of Jimple statements don't copy the tags, but even after I added
> this the tags were missing.
> 
> Could this be a bug in Soot?
> Is there some way to make Soot keep these tags?
> 
> Thanks and regards,
> Roman