Linear Genetic Programming: Intron removal algorithm











up vote
0
down vote

favorite













  1. Let set R_eff always contain all registers that are effective at the current program position. R_eff := { r | r is output register }. Start at the last program instruction and move backwards.

  2. Mark the next preceding operation in program with: destination register r_dest element-of R_eff. If such an instruction is not found then go to 5.

  3. .If the operation directly follows a branch or a sequence of branches then mark these instructions too. Otherwise remove r_dest
    from R_eff .

  4. Insert each source (operand) register r_op of newly marked
    instructions in R_eff if not already contained. Go to 2.

  5. Stop. All unmarked instructions are introns.


This is the algorithm given , I know the question was asked before, but I'm not clear on a few things( and turns out there isn't much online material assisting with this stuff). I mainly need to know what we're comparing. You have a program, and within the program, are instructions with the form of :




r0= r1 + r2




Just as an example. So I understand we start at the last instruction and move backwards for our comparisons. But in step 2 when it says to move backwards are we going back the to the immediately previous instructions, or are we moving backwards to the instruction with a register in common?
For the example I gave, would I keep searching backwards till I found another r0, or would I go backwards until I found a r1 or r2?



I'm pretty confused with this simple thing and would appreciate any help I can get










share|improve this question







New contributor




Robin White is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
























    up vote
    0
    down vote

    favorite













    1. Let set R_eff always contain all registers that are effective at the current program position. R_eff := { r | r is output register }. Start at the last program instruction and move backwards.

    2. Mark the next preceding operation in program with: destination register r_dest element-of R_eff. If such an instruction is not found then go to 5.

    3. .If the operation directly follows a branch or a sequence of branches then mark these instructions too. Otherwise remove r_dest
      from R_eff .

    4. Insert each source (operand) register r_op of newly marked
      instructions in R_eff if not already contained. Go to 2.

    5. Stop. All unmarked instructions are introns.


    This is the algorithm given , I know the question was asked before, but I'm not clear on a few things( and turns out there isn't much online material assisting with this stuff). I mainly need to know what we're comparing. You have a program, and within the program, are instructions with the form of :




    r0= r1 + r2




    Just as an example. So I understand we start at the last instruction and move backwards for our comparisons. But in step 2 when it says to move backwards are we going back the to the immediately previous instructions, or are we moving backwards to the instruction with a register in common?
    For the example I gave, would I keep searching backwards till I found another r0, or would I go backwards until I found a r1 or r2?



    I'm pretty confused with this simple thing and would appreciate any help I can get










    share|improve this question







    New contributor




    Robin White is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.






















      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      0
      down vote

      favorite












      1. Let set R_eff always contain all registers that are effective at the current program position. R_eff := { r | r is output register }. Start at the last program instruction and move backwards.

      2. Mark the next preceding operation in program with: destination register r_dest element-of R_eff. If such an instruction is not found then go to 5.

      3. .If the operation directly follows a branch or a sequence of branches then mark these instructions too. Otherwise remove r_dest
        from R_eff .

      4. Insert each source (operand) register r_op of newly marked
        instructions in R_eff if not already contained. Go to 2.

      5. Stop. All unmarked instructions are introns.


      This is the algorithm given , I know the question was asked before, but I'm not clear on a few things( and turns out there isn't much online material assisting with this stuff). I mainly need to know what we're comparing. You have a program, and within the program, are instructions with the form of :




      r0= r1 + r2




      Just as an example. So I understand we start at the last instruction and move backwards for our comparisons. But in step 2 when it says to move backwards are we going back the to the immediately previous instructions, or are we moving backwards to the instruction with a register in common?
      For the example I gave, would I keep searching backwards till I found another r0, or would I go backwards until I found a r1 or r2?



      I'm pretty confused with this simple thing and would appreciate any help I can get










      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Robin White is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.












      1. Let set R_eff always contain all registers that are effective at the current program position. R_eff := { r | r is output register }. Start at the last program instruction and move backwards.

      2. Mark the next preceding operation in program with: destination register r_dest element-of R_eff. If such an instruction is not found then go to 5.

      3. .If the operation directly follows a branch or a sequence of branches then mark these instructions too. Otherwise remove r_dest
        from R_eff .

      4. Insert each source (operand) register r_op of newly marked
        instructions in R_eff if not already contained. Go to 2.

      5. Stop. All unmarked instructions are introns.


      This is the algorithm given , I know the question was asked before, but I'm not clear on a few things( and turns out there isn't much online material assisting with this stuff). I mainly need to know what we're comparing. You have a program, and within the program, are instructions with the form of :




      r0= r1 + r2




      Just as an example. So I understand we start at the last instruction and move backwards for our comparisons. But in step 2 when it says to move backwards are we going back the to the immediately previous instructions, or are we moving backwards to the instruction with a register in common?
      For the example I gave, would I keep searching backwards till I found another r0, or would I go backwards until I found a r1 or r2?



      I'm pretty confused with this simple thing and would appreciate any help I can get







      genetic-programming






      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Robin White is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question







      New contributor




      Robin White is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question






      New contributor




      Robin White is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 2 days ago









      Robin White

      1




      1




      New contributor




      Robin White is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      Robin White is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      Robin White is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





























          active

          oldest

          votes











          Your Answer






          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
          StackExchange.snippets.init();
          });
          });
          }, "code-snippets");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "1"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });






          Robin White is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53343667%2flinear-genetic-programming-intron-removal-algorithm%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown






























          active

          oldest

          votes













          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes








          Robin White is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










           

          draft saved


          draft discarded


















          Robin White is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













          Robin White is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          Robin White is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.















           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53343667%2flinear-genetic-programming-intron-removal-algorithm%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          "Incorrect syntax near the keyword 'ON'. (on update cascade, on delete cascade,)

          Alcedinidae

          Origin of the phrase “under your belt”?