News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Symbolic Execution: Intuition and Implementation by Patient0 on Friday March 09, 2018 @04:54AM (#16550784)
To me there's a lot of similarities between this and type inference.

"First, as we step through this program, we don’t think about specific values of x like 13. Instead, we think about the set of possible values x might take on. At different points in the program, x might be an element of all integers, negative integers, or positive integers plus 0. In other words, we think of x as a symbolic value (i.e., a set of possible values) rather than a concrete value (i.e., a particular element of that set of possible values)."

vs:

"We expound a view of type checking as evaluation with ‘abstract values’."

http://okmij.org/ftp/Computation/FLOLAC/lecture.pdf

Re:Symbolic Execution: Intuition and Implementation by int3 on Friday March 09, 2018 @05:44AM (#16550963)
Type inference is a special case of abstract interpretation: https://www.irif.fr/~mellies/mpri/mpri-ens/articles/cousot-t...

(Not that I've read that paper in detail, mind you...)

Re:Symbolic Execution: Intuition and Implementation by UncleMeat on Friday March 09, 2018 @02:12PM (#16554073)
"Abstract values" and "symbolic values" mean different things. Abstract interpretation and symbolic execution are both powerful static analysis techniques, but they are not (classically) equivalent in function.