2.

Discuss the role of various phases of the compiler in the transla on of source program to
object code?
Sure, here's a comprehensive overview of the various phases of a compiler and their roles in
transla ng a source program to object code:

1. **Lexical Analysis (Scanning):** This phase is responsible for breaking the source code
into tokens (keywords, iden fiers, literals, etc.). It removes white spaces and comments,
genera ng a stream of tokens. The role of this phase is to simplify the subsequent parsing
process by providing a clean input.

2. **Syntax Analysis (Parsing):** In this phase, the token stream produced by the lexical
analyzer is converted into a parse tree or syntax tree based on the grammar of the
programming language. The parser checks whether the sequence of tokens conforms to the
grammar rules of the language. If any syntax errors are detected, appropriate error messages
are generated.

3. **Seman c Analysis:** Seman c analysis checks the meaning of the source program. It
ensures that the program adheres to the language seman cs. This phase involves type
checking, symbol table management, and other seman c checks. It also resolves ambigui es
and enforces constraints imposed by the language.

4. **Intermediate Code Genera on:** At this stage, the compiler generates an intermediate
representa on of the source program. This representa on is o en in the form of
intermediate code, which is closer to the machine language but s ll abstract enough to allow
for op miza ons. Common intermediate representa ons include Three-Address Code (TAC)
or Abstract Syntax Trees (AST).

5. **Op miza on:** Op miza on is an op onal phase in the compila on process. It aims to
improve the efficiency of the generated code by applying various op miza on techniques
such as constant folding, loop op miza on, and dead code elimina on. The goal is to
produce object code that runs faster or consumes less memory.

6. **Code Genera on:** This phase translates the intermediate representa on into target
machine code. It maps the constructs of the source language to corresponding machine
instruc ons or sequences of instruc ons. The code generator must consider the target
architecture and instruc on set to produce efficient and correct code.

7. **Symbol Table Management:** Throughout the compila on process, the compiler

maintains a symbol table, which stores informa on about iden fiers (variables, func ons,
etc.) used in the source program. This informa on includes the name, type, scope, and
memory loca on of each iden fier. Symbol table management ensures that iden fiers are
declared before use and resolves references to iden fiers.

8. **Error Handling:** Error handling is an integral part of the compiler's func onality. It
detects and reports errors found during the compila on process, such as syntax errors,
seman c errors, or op miza on failures. Error messages provide feedback to the
programmer, helping them debug their code.
9. **Linking (for mul -file programs):** In the case of mul -file programs, the linker
combines object code generated from different source files into a single executable or
library. It resolves references between different modules and ensures that all necessary code
and data are linked together properly.

10. **Documenta on and Repor ng:** Finally, the compiler may generate documenta on or
reports summarizing the compila on process. This documenta on may include informa on
about compiler version, compila on op ons, op miza on sta s cs, and any warnings or
errors encountered during compila on.

Each phase of the compiler plays a crucial role in transla ng a source program into object
code, ul mately enabling the execu on of the program on the target machine.

5.Discuss the ac on taken by every phase of compiler on the following string

A=B*C+D/E
A compiler translates a high-level programming language into machine code that a computer
can execute. The process involves several phases, each with specific ac ons to process the
input string "A=B*C+D/E".

1. **Lexical Analysis (Scanner)**:

- The scanner breaks the input into tokens: iden fiers (A, B, C, D, E), operators (=, *, +, /),
and separators (,).
- It removes whitespace and comments.

2. **Syntax Analysis (Parser)**:

- The parser verifies the syntax according to the language's grammar rules. For example, it
ensures proper operator precedence and operand usage.
- It constructs a parse tree to represent the syntac c structure of the input.

3. **Seman c Analysis**:
- This phase checks the meaning of the program beyond its syntax. It ensures that
opera ons are performed on compa ble types and variables are declared before use.
- For "A=B*C+D/E", it checks the types of variables and whether they are compa ble for
the opera ons.

4. **Intermediate Code Genera on**:

- The compiler generates an intermediate representa on of the input code. This
representa on is o en more abstract and easier to manipulate.
- In this phase, the compiler may generate intermediate code like three-address code or
abstract syntax trees.

5. **Op miza on**:

- The compiler applies various op miza ons to improve the efficiency of the generated
code. These op miza ons can include constant folding, loop op miza on, and dead code
elimina on.
- For "A=B*C+D/E", the compiler may op mize arithme c expressions to minimize the
number of instruc ons required for execu on.
6. **Code Genera on**:
- Finally, the compiler translates the op mized intermediate code into machine code for
the target architecture.
- It generates assembly code or directly emits machine code instruc ons for execu on on
the target processor.

Each phase of the compiler contributes to the transforma on of the input string
"A=B*C+D/E" into executable machine code, ensuring correctness, efficiency, and adherence
to language seman cs and syntax.

25.How we can construct SLR parsing table given the algorithm?

Construc ng an SLR (Simple LR) parsing table involves several steps based on a specific
algorithm. Here's a concise overview of the process:

1. **Augment the Grammar**:

- Start by augmen ng the given grammar with a new start symbol and a new produc on
rule with this start symbol as the head. This ensures that there is a unique start state in the
parsing table.

2. **Compute LR(0) Items**:

- Compute the LR(0) items for each produc on in the augmented grammar. LR(0) items
represent possible configura ons of the parser's stack and input.

3. **Construct Canonical Collec on of LR(0) Items**:

- Construct the canonical collec on of LR(0) items by finding the closure of LR(0) items and
compu ng goto transi ons. This collec on represents all possible states of the LR parser.

4. **Build LR(0) Parsing Table**:

- Create the LR(0) parsing table, which consists of ac on and goto entries.
- For each state in the canonical collec on:
- For each terminal symbol, determine shi or reduce ac ons based on the LR(0) items in
the state.
- For each non-terminal symbol, determine the next state (goto entry) based on the goto
transi ons.

5. **Resolve Conflicts**:
- Resolve conflicts in the parsing table, if any, such as shi -reduce or reduce-reduce
conflicts. Conflicts may arise when mul ple ac ons are possible for a given state and input
symbol.

6. **Construct SLR(1) Parsing Table** (Op onal):

- Op onally, refine the LR(0) parsing table to create an SLR(1) parsing table by considering
the lookahead symbols. This helps in resolving certain conflicts.

7. **Verify the Parsing Table**:

- Ensure that the constructed parsing table is correct and complete for the given grammar.
Test it with example strings to validate its func onality.
By following these steps based on the SLR parsing algorithm, you can construct a parsing
table that guides the parsing process for a given grammar, facilita ng efficient syntax analysis
of input strings.

49.What is an LR (0) items? How are closure and go to opera ons performed on LR (0)
items?
LR(0) items are configura ons used in LR(0) parsing, represen ng poten al states of a
parser's stack and input during parsing. An LR(0) item consists of a produc on rule with a dot
(·) indica ng the current posi on of the parser within the rule. These items provide insight
into the parser's state and the poten al transi ons it can make based on the input.

**Closure Opera on**:

The closure opera on is used to compute the closure of a set of LR(0) items. Given a set of
LR(0) items, the closure opera on expands it by adding all LR(0) items that can be derived
from the current set. This involves considering all produc ons where the dot is immediately
before a non-terminal symbol and adding corresponding LR(0) items for those non-terminals.
The process con nues recursively un l no new LR(0) items can be added.

**Example of Closure Opera on**:

Consider a grammar G with a produc on A → α·Bβ and another produc on B → γ. If the set
contains the LR(0) item A → α·Bβ, the closure opera on adds B → ·γ to the set, as B is
immediately before the dot in the A produc on.

**Goto Opera on**:

The goto opera on computes the transi on from one LR(0) item set to another based on a
given symbol. It is used to determine the next state of the LR(0) automaton. Given a set of
LR(0) items and a symbol, the goto opera on generates a new set of LR(0) items by shi ing
the dot one posi on to the right in all items where the dot is immediately before the given
symbol.

**Example of Goto Opera on**:

If the current LR(0) item set contains items such as A → αB·β and B → ·γ, applying the goto
opera on with symbol B would result in a new set containing B → γ·.

By performing closure and goto opera ons, LR(0) items facilitate the construc on of LR(0)
parsing tables and help determine the transi ons and states of the parser during parsing.

51.What are the components of a table driven predic ve parser? Which of those are
dependent the grammar that is being parsed? What are the advantages of table driven
predic ve parser?
A table-driven predic ve parser relies on a parsing table to determine the parsing
ac ons for each input symbol based on the current state of the parser's stack. The components
of a table-driven predic ve parser include:

1. **Parsing Table**:
- The parsing table is the core component of a table-driven predic ve parser. It
typically consists of rows represen ng states of the parser and columns represen ng input
symbols.
 - Each entry in the table specifies a parsing ac on to be taken based on the current
state and the input symbol. These ac ons can include shi ing to the next state, reducing by a
produc on rule, or indica ng an error.

2. **Stack**:
- The parser maintains a stack to keep track of the current state during parsing.
- It uses the stack to perform parsing ac ons based on the informa on retrieved
from the parsing table.

3. **Input Buffer**:
- The input buffer contains the input string to be parsed. The parser reads symbols
from this buffer one at a me.

4. **Grammar**:
- Although not directly a component of the parser implementa on, the grammar
being parsed heavily influences the construc on of the parsing table.
- The parsing table entries are dependent on the grammar's produc ons, terminals,
and non-terminals.

Advantages of table-driven predic ve parsers include:

1. **Efficiency**:
- Table-driven parsers typically have a fixed, finite set of parsing ac ons stored in the
parsing table, leading to efficient parsing performance.

2. **Ease of Implementa on**:

- Once the parsing table is constructed, the parser logic becomes rela vely
straigh orward, simplifying the implementa on process.

3. **Predictability**:
- The parsing process is determinis c and predictable since the parsing ac ons are
precomputed and stored in the table.

4. **Support for Various Grammars**:

- Table-driven parsers can handle a wide range of grammars, including ambiguous
and le -recursive grammars, with appropriate modifica ons to the parsing table genera on
algorithm.

5. **Separa on of Concerns**:
- The separa on of parsing logic into a table and a stack facilitates modular design
and maintenance of the parser.

Overall, table-driven predic ve parsers offer a robust and efficient approach to

parsing, par cularly for LL(1) grammars, where each parsing decision can be made solely based
on the current state and the next input symbol.
52.Describe the SLR (1) method of construc ng the LR parsing table from a given grammar?
The SLR(1) method (Simple LR with one-symbol lookahead) constructs an LR parsing table
based on a given grammar. Here's a step-by-step descrip on of the SLR(1) method:

1. **Augment the Grammar**:

- Start by augmen ng the given grammar with a new start symbol and a new produc on
rule with this start symbol as the head. This ensures that there is a unique start state in the
parsing table.

2. **Compute LR(0) Items**:

- Compute the LR(0) items for each produc on in the augmented grammar. LR(0) items
represent possible configura ons of the parser's stack and input.

3. **Construct Canonical Collec on of LR(0) Items**:

- Construct the canonical collec on of LR(0) items by finding the closure of LR(0) items and
compu ng goto transi ons. This collec on represents all possible states of the LR parser.

4. **Compute Lookaheads**:
- For each LR(0) item \( [A \rightarrow \alpha \cdot] \), compute the lookahead symbols by
examining the symbols that can follow \( A \) in any senten al form. This can be determined
from the grammar rules.

5. **Compute FIRST and FOLLOW sets**:

- Compute the FIRST and FOLLOW sets for all non-terminal symbols in the grammar. These
sets are used to determine the lookahead symbols for each LR(0) item.

6. **Build SLR(1) Parsing Table**:

- Create the SLR(1) parsing table, which consists of ac on and goto entries.
- For each state in the canonical collec on:
- For each terminal symbol, determine shi or reduce ac ons based on the LR(0) items
and lookahead symbols in the state.
- For each non-terminal symbol, determine the next state (goto entry) based on the goto
transi ons.

7. **Resolve Conflicts**:
- Resolve conflicts in the parsing table, if any, such as shi -reduce or reduce-reduce
conflicts. Conflicts may arise when mul ple ac ons are possible for a given state and input
symbol.

8. **Verify the Parsing Table**:

- Ensure that the constructed parsing table is correct and complete for the given grammar.
Test it with example strings to validate its func onality.

By following these steps, the SLR(1) method constructs an LR parsing table tailored to handle
the parsing process for the given grammar, facilita ng efficient syntax analysis of input
strings.
 86.How do you generate target code for arithme c TAC operators in a template based code
genera on approach? Illustrate with examples for (a) ADD (b) SUB (c) MUL (4) DIV

In a template-based code genera on approach for Three-Address Code (TAC) operators like
ADD, SUB, MUL, and DIV, each operator is mapped to a corresponding template or pa ern
that represents the target code genera on process. Here's how you can generate target code
for each arithme c TAC operator:

1. **ADD (Addi on)**:

 Template: result←operand1+operand2result←operand1+operand2
- Example:
```assembly
ADD result, operand1, operand2
```

2. **SUB (Subtrac on)**:

 Template: result←operand1−operand2result←operand1−operand2
- Example:
```assembly
SUB result, operand1, operand2
```

3. **MUL (Mul plica on)**:

 - Template: result←operand1×operand2result←operand1×operand2
- Example:
```assembly
MUL result, operand1, operand2
```

4. **DIV (Division)**:
 - Template: result←operand1÷operand2result←operand1÷operand2
- Example:
```assembly
DIV result, operand1, operand2
```

In the template-based approach, you have predefined pa erns for each opera on, where
placeholders like "result", "operand1", and "operand2" are replaced with actual values
during code genera on. These templates ensure consistency and ease of code genera on
across different arithme c opera ons.

When genera ng target code for TAC operators, the compiler iden fies the opera on (e.g.,
ADD, SUB) from the TAC instruc on and subs tutes the corresponding template with actual
operands to produce the final assembly or machine code. This approach simplifies code
genera on by separa ng the concerns of opera on iden fica on and code emission.
By using templates for arithme c TAC operators, the compiler can efficiently produce target
code for arithme c expressions while maintaining flexibility and clarity in the code
genera on process.

95.What is copy propaga on? illustrate how the copy propaga on facilitates other
op miza on opportuni es?
Copy propaga on is an op miza on technique in compilers that replaces uses of a variable
with its current value if it can be determined that the variable's value has not changed since
its last assignment. Essen ally, it iden fies instances where a variable's value is copied into
another variable and replaces subsequent uses of the original variable with the copy.

Illustra on:
Consider the following code snippet:

```python
x = 10
y = x # Copy propaga on: Replace y = x with y = 10
z=y+5
```

A er copy propaga on, the code becomes:

```python
x = 10
y = 10
z=y+5
```

Copy propaga on facilitates other op miza on opportuni es by simplifying the code and
poten ally enabling further op miza ons:

1. **Constant Folding**:
- A er copy propaga on, the compiler can perform constant folding, where expressions
involving constants are evaluated at compile me. In the example, the expression "y + 5" can
be simplified to "10 + 5" or "15".

2. **Dead Code Elimina on**:

- Copy propaga on may reveal dead code, which consists of code that does not affect the
program's output. If the original variable is not used a er its value is copied, the compiler
can eliminate the dead code related to the original variable.

3. **Strength Reduc on**:

- Copy propaga on can enable strength reduc on, where expensive opera ons are
replaced with cheaper alterna ves. If a variable's value is copied before being used in an
opera on, the opera on can poten ally be simplified or replaced with a cheaper one.

4. **Register Alloca on**:

 - By reducing the number of live variables, copy propaga on can improve register
alloca on by decreasing the register pressure, leading to be er u liza on of available
registers.

Overall, copy propaga on not only eliminates unnecessary variable copies but also sets the
stage for other op miza ons by simplifying the code and revealing op miza on
opportuni es that were previously hidden.

100.Explain the following terms in the context of Intermediate code op miza on (i) Basic
Block (ii) DAG (iii) Local and Global op miza on
In the context of intermediate code op miza on, several terms play crucial roles in analyzing
and transforming code for improved efficiency. Let's explain each term:

1. **Basic Block**:
- A basic block is a sequence of consecu ve instruc ons in a program with a single entry
point and a single exit point. It starts with a leader instruc on, typically the target of a
branch or jump, and ends with a branch, jump, or return instruc on.
- Basic blocks are fundamental units for analyzing and op mizing code. They help in
iden fying regions of code with well-defined control flow, enabling op miza ons such as
common subexpression elimina on and code mo on.

2. **DAG (Directed Acyclic Graph)**:

- In the context of intermediate code op miza on, a DAG represents expressions in a
program as a directed acyclic graph.
- Each node in the DAG represents either a variable, constant, or opera on, and edges
represent data dependencies between nodes.
- DAGs are used for common subexpression elimina on, where redundant computa ons
are replaced with references to previously computed values stored in the DAG.

3. **Local and Global Op miza on**:

- **Local op miza on** focuses on improving code within a single basic block or a small
region of code. It includes op miza ons like constant folding, copy propaga on, and strength
reduc on.
- **Global op miza on** considers the en re program or larger sec ons of code beyond
individual basic blocks. It involves op miza ons such as loop op miza on, func on inlining,
and inter-procedural analysis.
- Local op miza ons are typically applied first because they are simpler and have a lower
overhead. Global op miza ons are more complex and may require analysis of the en re
program's control flow and data flow.

In summary, basic blocks provide a structured way to analyze and op mize code, DAGs
represent expressions for op miza on purposes, and local and global op miza on strategies
target different scopes of code for efficiency improvements.
106.Explain the following terms (a) Flow Graph (b) Point and Path (c) defini on and usage
variables in TAC

(a) **Flow Graph**:

A flow graph is a directed graph used in compiler op miza on and analysis to represent the
control flow of a program. Nodes in the graph represent basic blocks, while edges represent
control flow between these blocks. The entry node represents the star ng point of the
program, and exit nodes represent termina on points. Flow graphs help visualize the flow of
control in a program, aiding in op miza ons such as dead code elimina on, loop
op miza on, and register alloca on.

(b) **Point and Path**:

In the context of program analysis and op miza on, "point" refers to a specific loca on in
the program, such as a par cular instruc on or statement. It could be a point where a
variable is defined or used, or a point where control flow decisions are made.
A "path" refers to a sequence of points in the program, typically between two specific points.
Paths are important for understanding the execu on flow and dependencies within a
program. For example, a path from the entry point to a par cular statement helps determine
all the instruc ons that will be executed along that path.

(c) **Defini on and Usage Variables in TAC**:

In Three-Address Code (TAC), a "defini on" refers to an assignment or ini aliza on of a
variable. It's where a variable is given a value. For example, in the TAC statement `x = y + 5`,
`x` is being defined.
"Usage" refers to the points in the code where a variable is referenced or used. In the TAC
statement `z = x * 2`, `x` is being used.
Understanding the defini ons and usages of variables is crucial for various op miza ons like
common subexpression elimina on, where redundant computa ons involving the same
variable can be eliminated to improve efficiency. By tracking the defini ons and usages of
variables in TAC, compilers can analyze and op mize code more effec vely.
109.Explain the terms (a) Domina on (b) Back edge (c ) pre header (d) natural loop
Certainly!

(a) **Domina on**:

In program analysis and op miza on, domina on refers to the rela onship between basic
blocks in a control flow graph. A basic block \( B_1 \) is said to dominate another basic block
\( B_2 \) if every path from the entry node to \( B_2 \) must go through \( B_1 \). In other
words, \( B_1 \) dominates \( B_2 \) if it is impossible to reach \( B_2 \) without first passing
through \( B_1 \). Domina on is essen al for various analyses and op miza ons, such as
dead code elimina on and loop analysis.

(b) **Back Edge**:

A back edge is an edge in a control flow graph that connects a node to one of its ancestors in
a depth-first traversal of the graph. Specifically, in a directed graph, a back edge goes from a
node \( B \) to an ancestor \( A \), where \( A \) dominates \( B \). Back edges are indica ve
of loops in the control flow graph. Detec ng back edges is crucial for iden fying and
analyzing loops in programs, enabling loop op miza ons such as loop invariant code mo on
and loop unrolling.
(c) **Pre-header**:
A pre-header is a basic block in a control flow graph that immediately precedes the header of
a loop. It is a single-entry, single-exit block placed before the loop header to ensure that
control enters the loop through a single point. Pre-headers are o en added during loop
op miza on transforma ons to facilitate analyses and transforma ons within the loop body,
such as loop induc on variable analysis and loop-invariant code mo on.

(d) **Natural Loop**:

A natural loop, also known as a structured loop, is a loop in a control flow graph that follows
a specific structure. It consists of a loop header, which is the entry point of the loop, along
with one or more back edges that connect the loop header to nodes inside the loop body.
Natural loops are important for loop op miza ons as they provide a structured
representa on of the loop, facilita ng analysis and transforma on techniques tailored to
loops.

110. What is peep-hole op miza on Give five examples of pa erns and their replacements
used in peep-hole op miza on ,jus fying the improvement in memory op miza on?
Peephole op miza on is a local op miza on technique performed on a small window or
"peephole" of code instruc ons. It focuses on iden fying and replacing pa erns of code with
more efficient or op mized equivalents within this limited scope. Peephole op miza on can
improve code quality, execu on speed, and memory usage by elimina ng redundant or
inefficient code sequences.

Five examples of common pa erns and their replacements used in peephole op miza on,
along with jus fica ons for memory op miza on, are:

1. **Redundant Load Elimina on**:

- Pa ern: Loading a variable from memory mul ple mes unnecessarily.
- Replacement: Store the variable in a register and reuse it.
- Jus fica on: Reduces memory access overhead, especially in loops or hot code paths, by
minimizing unnecessary loads.

2. **Redundant Move Elimina on**:

- Pa ern: Moving a value from one register to another without performing any
computa on.
- Replacement: Eliminate the redundant move instruc on.
- Jus fica on: Saves instruc on execu on me and reduces register pressure, conserving
memory resources.

3. **Constant Folding**:
- Pa ern: Performing arithme c or logical opera ons with constant operands.
- Replacement: Compute the result at compile me and replace the opera on with the
constant result.
- Jus fica on: Reduces run me computa on and code size, leading to memory savings.

4. **Unused Variable Removal**:

- Pa ern: Variables that are declared but not used.
 - Replacement: Remove the declara on and assignments of unused variables.
- Jus fica on: Reduces memory footprint by elimina ng unnecessary storage for unused
variables.

5. **Peephole Loop Op miza on**:

- Pa ern: Inefficient loop constructs.
- Replacement: Transform the loop to use more efficient constructs, such as loop unrolling
or loop fusion.
- Jus fica on: Improves memory locality and reduces loop overhead, resul ng in faster
execu on and poten ally reducing memory consump on.

In summary, peephole op miza on focuses on small, localized code sequences and aims to
improve memory op miza on by elimina ng redundant or inefficient opera ons, reducing
memory accesses, and op mizing code size and execu on speed.

116.
(a) Explain the Abstract Transla on scheme (b) Translate a*d — (b+c) into pos ix form
(a) **Abstract Transla on Scheme (ATS)**:
An Abstract Transla on Scheme (ATS) is a high-level representa on used in compilers to
describe the transla on process from the source language to the target language without
ge ng into low-level implementa on details. It serves as an intermediate representa on
between the source code and the final machine code or executable. An ATS defines the
structure of the transla on rules without specifying how these rules are implemented. It
abstracts away the complexi es of code genera on, op miza on, and machine-specific
details, allowing for be er portability and modularity in compiler design. An ATS typically
consists of produc on rules or transforma ons that map constructs from the source
language to constructs in the target language. It helps in separa ng the concerns of syntax
and seman cs from the specifics of code genera on, enabling easier maintenance,
op miza on, and retarge ng of compilers.

(b) **Transla on of a*d — (b+c) into Pos ix Form**:

To translate the expression \( a*d - (b+c) \) into pos ix form, we can use the infix to pos ix
conversion algorithm, also known as the shun ng-yard algorithm. Here's the step-by-step
transla on:

1. Write the expression in infix nota on: \( a*d - (b+c) \).

2. Apply the shun ng-yard algorithm to convert the infix expression to pos ix form:
- Step 1: Process the expression from le to right.
- Step 2: If an operand is encountered, output it immediately.
- Step 3: If an operator is encountered, push it onto a stack. Before pushing an operator
onto the stack, pop and output any operators from the stack that have higher precedence.
- Step 4: When encountering a closing parenthesis, pop and output operators from the
stack un l an opening parenthesis is encountered (but do not output the parentheses
themselves).
3. A er processing the en re expression, pop and output any remaining operators from the
stack.
4. The pos ix expression for \( a*d - (b+c) \) is \( a d * b c + - \).
185.
Consider the following code snippet wri en in a high-level programming language:
int foo(int a, int b) {
int result = a + b;
return result;
}
int main( {
int x = 5;
int y = 10;
int z = foo(x, y);
return 0;
}
Assuming the above code is compiled using a compiler, answer the following ques ons:

a) Iden fy any redundant code or opera ons present in the code snippet land explain how
they can be op mized. Jus fy your answer with relevant examples.

b} Discuss the concept of loop op miza on and provide at least two techniques that can
be used to op mize loops in the given code snippet. Explain leach technique in detail and
illustrate how it can improve the performance of the code.

c) Compare and contrast the benefits and limita ons of loop unrolling and loop fusion as
loop op miza on techniques. Provide examples of scenarios where leach technique can be
useful and scenarios where they may not be effec ve.
Abstract Transla on Scheme (ATS) serves as a bridge between the source code and the target
code in a compiler, abstrac ng the transla on process while omi ng low-level
implementa on intricacies. It defines rules and transforma ons that map constructs from
the source language to the target language, facilita ng a structured approach to code
genera on without delving into machine-specific details. By opera ng at a higher level of
abstrac on, ATS fosters portability, modularity, and maintainability in compiler design.

An ATS typically comprises produc on rules or transforma ons that specify how constructs
from the source language are translated into the target language. These rules encompass
various aspects of transla on, such as syntax, seman cs, and op miza on strategies. By
separa ng concerns related to syntax and seman cs from the specifics of code genera on,
ATS allows for easier maintenance, op miza on, and retarge ng of compilers across
different pla orms.

Regarding the transla on of expressions into pos ix form, the infix to pos ix conversion
algorithm, also known as the shun ng-yard algorithm, provides a systema c approach. By
processing the expression from le to right and u lizing a stack to handle operators and
operands, the algorithm converts infix expressions into pos ix nota on, which is more
conducive to efficient evalua on. In the case of \( a*d - (b+c) \), the applica on of the
shun ng-yard algorithm yields the pos ix expression \( a d * b c + - \), which represents the
same computa on in a format suitable for stack-based evalua on. This transforma on
enhances the clarity and simplicity of expression evalua on, contribu ng to improved code
readability and poten ally op mizing memory usage during execu on.
186.
Consider the following C code snippet:
#include <stdio.h>
int foo(int a, int b) {
int result = 0;
for (int i = 0; i < a; i++) {
result += b;
}
return result;
}
int main() {
int x =5;
int y = 10;
int z = foo(x, y);
prin ("z = %d ", z);
return 0;
)
Assume that the code is compiled using a compiler. then answer the following ques ons:

la) Analyze the given code and iden fy any redundant calcula ons or inefficient loops that
can be op mized. Provide specific sugges ons for op mizing the iden fied issues, and
jus fy your answer with relevant examples.

b} Apply loop unrolling to the for loop in the foo() func on to op mize its performance.
Explain how loop unrolling works and provide a modified version of the foo() func on with
loop unrolling applied. Calculate and compare the expected number of loop itera ons and
the total number of addi ons performed in the original and op mized versions of the
code.

c) Discuss the concept of common is subexpression elimina on as a code op miza on

technique. Iden fy any common subexpressions present in the given code, and explain
how they can be eliminated to improve the code's performance. Jus fy your answer with
examples and discuss the poten al impact on the overall performance of the code.

d) Propose a plan to profile and measure the performance of the op mized code using
appropriate profiling tools and performance metrics. Describe the steps you would take to
collect and analyze the performance data, and discuss how the results would be used to
validate the effec veness of the applied code op miza ons and iden fy any further areas
for op miza on.
a) Analysis and Op miza on Sugges ons:
The given code contains a redundant calcula on within the loop in the `foo()` func on. The
variable `result` is ini alized to 0 inside the loop, which is unnecessary because it is assigned
to `b` in each itera on of the loop. To op mize this, we can move the ini aliza on of `result`
outside the loop.

```c
int foo(int a, int b) {
int result = 0; // Move ini aliza on outside the loop
 for (int i = 0; i < a; i++) {
result += b;
}
return result;
}
```

By moving the ini aliza on of `result` outside the loop, we avoid unnecessary reassignment
in each itera on, improving the efficiency of the loop.

b) Loop Unrolling:
Loop unrolling is a compiler op miza on technique that aims to reduce loop overhead and
improve performance by execu ng mul ple loop itera ons in a single itera on. In the given
code, we can unroll the loop in the `foo()` func on by processing mul ple itera ons of the
loop in each itera on.

```c
int foo(int a, int b) {
int result = 0;
int i;
for (i = 0; i < a - 1; i += 2) { // Unroll loop by 2 itera ons
result += b;
result += b;
}
// Handle remaining itera on if 'a' is odd
if (i < a) {
result += b;
}
return result;
}
```

In this modified version, the loop is unrolled by two itera ons, reducing the number of loop
itera ons and improving performance.

c) Common Subexpression Elimina on (CSE):

Common subexpression elimina on is a compiler op miza on technique that iden fies and
eliminates redundant computa ons of the same expression within a program. In the given
code, the expression `result += b;` is repeated within the loop. By recognizing this common
subexpression and calcula ng it only once, we can improve the efficiency of the code.

```c
int foo(int a, int b) {
int result = 0;
int temp = b; // Common subexpression
for (int i = 0; i < a; i++) {
result += temp;
}
 return result;
}
```

By storing the result of `b` in a temporary variable `temp` outside the loop, we eliminate the
redundant computa on of `b` in each itera on, thereby improving performance.

d) Performance Measurement Plan:

To profile and measure the performance of the op mized code, we can follow these steps:
1. Use a profiling tool such as GNU gprof or Valgrind's Callgrind to collect performance data,
including CPU me, memory usage, and cache behavior.
2. Run the op mized code with a variety of input sizes and scenarios to gather representa ve
performance metrics.
3. Analyze the collected data to iden fy any performance bo lenecks and validate the
effec veness of the applied op miza ons.
4. Compare the performance metrics of the op mized code with the original version to
assess the impact of the op miza ons on run me efficiency.
5. Iterate on the op miza on process based on the profiling results, iden fying any further
areas for improvement and repea ng the measurement process as necessary.

187.
Consider the following grammar for a simple programming language:
<expr> ::= <term> + <expr>

| <term>

<term> ::= <factor> * <term>

| <factor>

<factor> ::= ( <expr> )

| <num>

<num> ::= <digit> <num>

| <digit>

<digit> = 0|1/2|3]4]5|/6]7]8|9

assume that a compiler is being designed for this programming language, and a syntax
directed transla on approach is used for the compiler's front-end. analyze your
understanding of syntax-directed transla on and answer the following ques ons:

a) Define syntax-directed transla on and explain how it relates to the compila on process.
Discuss the role of syntax-directed defini ons (SDDs) in implemen ng syntax-directed
transla on, and provide examples of how SDDs can be used to generate code or perform
other transla on tasks during compila on.
b) Design an SDD that implements a bo om-up syntax-directed transla on for the given
grammar. Use appropriate seman c ac ons for each produc on rule to perform transla on
tasks such as code genera on, a ribute computa on, or type checking. Provide a step-by-
step example of how your SDD can translate a simple input expression into an
intermediate representa on or target code.

c) Discuss the concept of abstract syntax trees (ASTs) and their role in syntax-directed
transla on. Explain how ASTs can be constructed during the parsing phase of compila on,
and how they can be used to store the syntac c structure and seman cs of a program.
Provide examples of how ASTs can be used in subsequent compila on phases, such as
seman c analysis, op miza on, land code genera on.

d) Compare and contrast top-down and bo om-up syntax-directed transla on approaches.

Discuss the key differences in their parsing strategies, the order of evalua on of seman c
ac ons, and the use of a ributes to propagate informa on during transla on. Provide
examples of situa ons where one approach may be preferred over the other, and explain
the ra onale behind your choice.

e) Explain how seman c ac ons can be associated with produc on rules in a syntax-
directed defini on (SDD), and how they can be used to perform various transla on tasks
during compila on, such as code genera on, a ribute computa on, or type checking.
Discuss the rela onship between the grammar rules, the syntax tree, and the SDD, and
how they work together to implement syntax-directed transla on.
a) **Syntax-Directed Transla on (SDT)**:
Syntax-directed transla on is a method used in compiler design where transla on rules are
associated with the produc on rules of a grammar. It relates to the compila on process by
defining how to generate target code or perform other transla on tasks directly from the
syntax of the source language. Syntax-directed defini ons (SDDs) are used to specify these
transla on rules in a formal manner. An SDD associates a ributes with grammar symbols and
specifies seman c rules or ac ons associated with produc on rules. These ac ons can
include code genera on, a ribute computa on, type checking, or any other transla on tasks
required during compila on.

For example, consider the following SDD for a simple arithme c expression grammar:

```
<expr> ::= <term> + <expr> { $$ = $1 + $3; }
| <term> { $$ = $1; }

<term> ::= <factor> * <term> { $$ = $1 * $3; }

| <factor> { $$ = $1; }

<factor> ::= ( <expr> ) { $$ = $2; }

| <num> { $$ = $1; }

<num> ::= <digit> <num> { $$ = $1 * 10 + $2; }

| <digit> { $$ = $1; }
<digit> ::= 0 { $$ = 0; }
| 1 { $$ = 1; }
| 2 { $$ = 2; }
| 3 { $$ = 3; }
| 4 { $$ = 4; }
| 5 { $$ = 5; }
| 6 { $$ = 6; }
| 7 { $$ = 7; }
| 8 { $$ = 8; }
| 9 { $$ = 9; }
```

In this SDD, seman c ac ons are associated with each produc on rule using curly braces `{}`.
These ac ons perform tasks such as compu ng a ribute values (`$$` represents the
synthesized a ribute), performing calcula ons, or genera ng code based on the input
symbols.

b) **SDD for Bo om-Up Syntax-Directed Transla on**:

Below is an SDD implemen ng bo om-up syntax-directed transla on for the given grammar.
We'll use seman c ac ons to perform a ribute computa on and code genera on tasks.

```
<expr> ::= <term> + <expr> { $$ = $1 + $3; }
| <term> { $$ = $1; }

<term> ::= <factor> * <term> { $$ = $1 * $3; }

| <factor> { $$ = $1; }

<factor> ::= ( <expr> ) { $$ = $2; }

| <num> { $$ = $1; }

<num> ::= <digit> <num> { $$ = $1 * 10 + $2; }

| <digit> { $$ = $1; }

<digit> ::= 0 { $$ = 0; }
| 1 { $$ = 1; }
| 2 { $$ = 2; }
| 3 { $$ = 3; }
| 4 { $$ = 4; }
| 5 { $$ = 5; }
| 6 { $$ = 6; }
| 7 { $$ = 7; }
| 8 { $$ = 8; }
| 9 { $$ = 9; }
```

Let's translate the input expression `2 * (3 + 4)` using the above SDD:
```
Input: 2 * (3 + 4)

Apply produc on rule: <digit> ::= 2

Apply produc on rule: <num> ::= <digit> = 2
Apply produc on rule: <factor> ::= <num> = 2
Apply produc on rule: <digit> ::= 3
Apply produc on rule: <num> ::= <digit> = 3
Apply produc on rule: <factor> ::= <num> = 3
Apply produc on rule: <digit> ::= 4
Apply produc on rule: <num> ::= <digit> = 4
Apply produc on rule: <factor> ::= <num> = 4
Apply produc on rule: <expr> ::= <term> = 4
Apply produc on rule: <expr> ::= <term> * <expr> = 4
Apply produc on rule: <expr> ::= <factor> = 4
Apply produc on rule: <expr> ::= <term> + <expr> = 4 + (3 * 4) = 4 + 12 = 16
```

c) **Abstract Syntax Trees (ASTs)**:

Abstract Syntax Trees (ASTs) are hierarchical representa ons of the syntac c structure of a
program, capturing its abstract syntax without including unnecessary details. During the
parsing phase of compila on, the parser constructs an AST based on the grammar rules and
input program. ASTs are used to store the program's syntac c structure and seman cs,
making it easier to perform subsequent compila on phases such as seman c analysis,
op miza on, and code genera on.

For example, consider the AST for the input expression `2 * (3 + 4)`:

```
*
/ \
2 +
/ \
3 4
```

ASTs can be traversed and analyzed to perform tasks such as type checking, scope resolu on,
and op miza on. They provide a structured representa on of the program's syntax and
seman cs, facilita ng efficient compila on and analysis.

d) **Comparison of Top-Down and Bo om-Up Syntax-Directed Transla on**:

Top-Down Syntax-Directed Transla on:

- Parsing strategy: Begins from the start symbol and tries to derive the input string.
- Evalua on order: Seman c ac ons are evaluated

as the parser descends the parse tree.

- A ribute propaga on: A ributes are typically synthesized from the children to the parent
nodes.
- Example: Recursive descent parsing.

Bo om-Up Syntax-Directed Transla on:

- Parsing strategy: Begins with the input symbols and tries to reduce them to the start
symbol.
- Evalua on order: Seman c ac ons are evaluated as the parser reduces the input symbols
to non-terminals.
- A ribute propaga on: A ributes are typically synthesized from the parent to the children
nodes.
- Example: Shi -Reduce parsing.

Preferences:
- Top-down parsing is o en preferred for its simplicity and ease of implementa on, especially
for LL(k) grammars.
- Bo om-up parsing is more powerful and can handle a wider range of grammars, making it
suitable for more complex languages.

e) **Seman c Ac ons in SDDs**:

Seman c ac ons are associated with produc on rules in an SDD using curly braces `{}`. They
are used to perform various transla on tasks during compila on, such as code genera on,
a ribute computa on, or type checking. Seman c ac ons are executed when a produc on
rule is applied during parsing and can access and manipulate a ributes associated with
grammar symbols. They enable the transforma on of the input program into an
intermediate representa on or target code.

The rela onship between grammar rules, the syntax tree, and the SDD is as follows:
- Grammar rules define the syntax of the source language and the structure of the syntax
tree.
- The syntax tree represents the hierarchical structure of the input program based on the
grammar rules.
- The SDD specifies how to perform transla on tasks based on the syntax tree, using
seman c ac ons associated with grammar rules.

Together, grammar rules, the syntax tree, and the SDD work in conjunc on to implement
syntax-directed transla on, allowing for the genera on of target code or other transla on
tasks directly from the syntax of the source language.
188.
a)Consider the following input statement land represent it in triples, indirect triples,
Quadruples and 3 address code
a =b*-c+b*-c
b)Explain about the sources and criterions of code op miza on as machine dependent and
independent types
a) Representa on in Triples, Indirect Triples, Quadruples, and Three-Address Code:

1. **Triples**:
```
(1) =b * -c
(2) =b * -c
(3) =1 + 2
(4) a = 3
```

2. **Indirect Triples**:
```
(1) * b, -c, t1
(2) * b, -c, t2
(3) + t1, t2, t3
(4) a, t3, -
```

3. **Quadruples**:
```
(1) *, b, -c, t1
(2) *, b, -c, t2
(3) +, t1, t2, t3
(4) =, t3, , a
```

4. **Three-Address Code**:
```
(1) t1 = b * -c
(2) t2 = b * -c
(3) t3 = t1 + t2
(4) a = t3
```

b) **Sources and Criteria of Code Op miza on**:

Code op miza on aims to improve the performance, efficiency, and quality of generated
code. It can be classified into machine-dependent and machine-independent types based on
the op miza on techniques and criteria used:

1. **Machine-Dependent Op miza on**:

 - **Target Architecture Specific**: These op miza ons target the characteris cs and
features of the underlying hardware architecture.
- **Examples**: Instruc on scheduling, register alloca on, and target-specific peephole
op miza ons.
- **Criteria**:
- **Performance**: Op miza ons focus on reducing execu on me and improving
resource u liza on, considering the instruc on set architecture (ISA) and pipeline
characteris cs.
- **Memory Usage**: Techniques like register alloca on and memory access op miza on
are crucial for reducing memory footprint and improving cache performance.
- **Parallelism and Concurrency**: Exploi ng parallelism, vectoriza on, and mul -core
architectures for be er performance.
- **Energy Efficiency**: Op miza on techniques aimed at reducing power consump on
and improving energy efficiency.

2. **Machine-Independent Op miza on**:

- **Target Architecture Agnos c**: These op miza ons focus on improving code quality
and performance without considering specific hardware details.
- **Examples**: Constant folding, loop op miza on, common subexpression elimina on,
and dead code elimina on.
- **Criteria**:
- **Code Size**: Reducing the size of generated code to improve memory usage and
reduce disk space requirements.
- **Algorithmic Efficiency**: Restructuring code to op mize algorithms and data
structures, resul ng in faster execu on.
- **Portability**: Ensuring that op mized code performs well across different hardware
pla orms and architectures.
- **Maintainability**: Op miza ons should not compromise code readability or
maintainability, facilita ng easier debugging and future modifica ons.

In summary, machine-dependent op miza ons target hardware-specific characteris cs to

improve performance and resource u liza on, while machine-independent op miza ons
focus on improving code quality, efficiency, and portability across different pla orms and
architectures. Both types of op miza ons play crucial roles in compiler design and code
genera on, contribu ng to the overall efficiency and effec veness of the compiled code.
 190.
(i)What is an ambiguous and unambiguous grammar? Iden fy the following grammar is
ambiguous or not
E-—E+E | E*E | (E)-E |id for the
sentence id+id*id
(ii)Prepare the following grammar is LL(1) but not SLR(1).
S—AaAb | BbBa
A->€
B->€

An ambiguous grammar is a grammar in which there are mul ple possible interpreta ons for
a given string of symbols. In contrast, an unambiguous grammar is one in which each string
of symbols has only one possible interpreta on.
For the given grammar:
mathema caCopy code
E -> E + E | E * E | (E) - E | id
and the sentence id + id * id,
This grammar is ambiguous. Let's break down the sentence:
1. id + id * id
2. (E) + id * id (using the produc on E -> (E))
3. ((E) + E) * id (using the produc on E -> E + E)
4. (((E) + E) * E) - id (using the produc on E -> E * E)
5. (((id) + E) * E) - id (using the produc on E -> id)
6. (((id) + id) * E) - id (using the produc on E -> id)
7. (((id) + id) * id) - id (using the produc on E -> id)
As you can see, there are mul ple ways to derive the sentence id + id * id, demonstra ng
ambiguity.
(ii) For a grammar to be LL(1) but not SLR(1), it means that the grammar can be parsed using
a le -to-right scan and le most deriva on with one token lookahead, but it cannot be
parsed using the Simple LR(1) parsing technique.
The given grammar is:
rustCopy code
S -> AaAb | BbBa A -> ε B -> ε
To determine if it's LL(1) but not SLR(1), let's construct the LL(1) parsing table:
b
Non-terminal a
S2
S S1
-
A ε
ε
B -
Here, S1 and S2 are the produc ons from S:
 S1: AaAb
 S2: BbBa
There's no conflict in the LL(1) parsing table, so the grammar is LL(1). However, this grammar
cannot be parsed by SLR(1) because it's not LR(0) (it's not even context-free), due to the
epsilon produc ons. SLR(1) parsers can only handle grammars that are LR(0), but this
grammar is not. Therefore, it's LL(1) but not SLR(1).

194.
Explain the steps for construc ng a Locked DAG. Construct the DAG for the following
expression ((x+y)-(x+y)*x-y))) + (x+y)*(x-y))
Construc ng a Locked Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG) involves several steps to efficiently
represent expressions while elimina ng redundancies:

1. **Tokeniza on**: Break down the expression into tokens, such as operators and
operands, while ignoring whitespace.

2. **Parsing**: Use a parsing algorithm like recursive descent or precedence climbing to

generate a parse tree. In the case of DAG construc on, the parse tree is augmented to avoid
redundant computa ons.

3. **Node Crea on**: Create nodes for each token, including operands and operators. For
each operator node, record its opera on and operands.

4. **DAG Construc on**: Traverse the parse tree in a bo om-up manner, iden fying
subexpressions that are repeated. Replace repeated subexpressions with references to
previously computed results. This step ensures that redundant computa ons are avoided.

5. **Locking**: Once the DAG is constructed, mark nodes that represent repeated
subexpressions as "locked." Locked nodes cannot be modified or replaced during further
op miza ons.

6. **Op miza on**: Perform addi onal op miza ons such as constant folding and strength
reduc on to further improve efficiency.

For the expression ((x+y)-(x+y)*x-y))) + (x+y)*(x-y)):

1. **Tokeniza on**: Tokens are (, x, +, y, ), -, (, x, +, y, ), *, x, -, y, ), ), +, (, x, +, y, ), *, (, x, -, y, ).

2. **Parsing**: Construct the parse tree according to the expression's grammar.

3. **Node Crea on**: Create nodes for each token in the parse tree.

4. **DAG Construc on**: Iden fy repeated subexpressions, such as (x+y) and (x+y)*x-y.
Replace repeated subexpressions with references to previously computed results.

5. **Locking**: Mark the nodes represen ng repeated subexpressions as locked to prevent

further modifica ons.

6. **Op miza on**: Apply addi onal op miza ons if desired.

The resul ng Locked DAG for the expression will have nodes represen ng unique
subexpressions, with redundant computa ons eliminated and locked to ensure efficiency
during further processing.

195.
A)Explain briefly about the principal sources of op miza on.
b) Write about the following in detail with suitable example
i. copy propaga on
ii. Dead code Elimina on
iii. code mo on
a) **Principal Sources of Op miza on:**

1. **Algorithmic Op miza on:** Focusing on improving algorithms and data structures to

enhance overall program efficiency. This involves choosing more efficient algorithms or
tweaking exis ng ones to reduce me complexity or memory usage.

2. **Compiler Op miza on:** U lizing compiler op miza ons to enhance code

performance. Compilers apply various techniques like constant folding, loop unrolling, and
inline expansion to generate more efficient machine code.

3. **Code-Level Op miza on:** Targe ng specific por ons of code to improve performance.
Techniques include loop op miza on, vectoriza on, and instruc on scheduling to make the
generated code run faster.

4. **Memory Op miza on:** Op mizing memory usage to minimize overhead and improve
cache locality. This includes techniques like memory pooling, data structure reorganiza on,
and stack alloca on.

5. **Parallelism and Concurrency Op miza on:** Leveraging parallel compu ng and

concurrency to u lize mul ple processing units effec vely. This involves techniques such as
parallel algorithms, mul threading, and task scheduling to improve throughput and reduce
latency.

b) **Detailed Explana on of Op miza on Techniques:**

i. **Copy Propaga on:** Copy propaga on is a compiler op miza on technique that

replaces the use of variables with their known constant values or values that are computed
from known constants. For example, consider the following code snippet:

```c
int x = 5;
int y = x + 3;
int z = y * 2;
```

In this case, copy propaga on can replace the variable `y` with its computed value `8`,
resul ng in:
```c
int x = 5;
int z = 8 * 2;
```

ii. **Dead Code Elimina on:** Dead code elimina on removes instruc ons or computa ons
from the program that do not contribute to the final output. This typically includes
unreachable code or code that computes values that are never used. For example:

```c
int x = 5;
int y = x * 2;
// Dead code: int z = x * 3;
return y;
```

The statement `int z = x * 3;` is dead code because the variable `z` is never used. Dead code
elimina on removes such statements, op mizing the program.

iii. **Code Mo on:** Code mo on, also known as loop invariant code mo on, moves
computa ons out of loops when they produce the same result in every itera on. For
example:

```c
for (int i = 0; i < 10; i++) {
int x = 5 * i;
// x can be moved outside the loop
prin ("%d\n", x);
}
```

Code mo on moves the computa on `5 * i` outside the loop to avoid redundant

computa ons, resul ng in improved performance.

196.
a)Summarize in detail about the dataflow analysis of available expression with suitable
example
b)Describe in detail about the flow of control op miza on
c) Iden fy the methods to eliminate the unreachable code, load and store data.
a) **Dataflow Analysis of Available Expressions:**

Dataflow analysis of available expressions is a compiler op miza on technique that iden fies
expressions that produce the same value at certain program points and then tries to
eliminate redundant computa ons by reusing the already computed values. The analysis
operates on a control flow graph (CFG) of the program, tracking the availability of
expressions at different program points.

Example:
Consider the following code snippet:

```c
1. int a = b + c;
2. int d = b + c;
3. int e = a * 2;
4. int f = b + c;
```

In this example, the expressions `b + c` are available at mul ple program points. The
dataflow analysis would iden fy these expressions and determine their availability within the
program. Then, it would op mize the code by replacing redundant computa ons with
previously computed values.

A er dataflow analysis, the op mized code would look like this:

```c
1. int temp = b + c;
2. int a = temp;
3. int d = temp;
4. int e = a * 2;
5. int f = temp;
```

Here, the expression `b + c` is computed once and stored in a temporary variable `temp`, and
then reused wherever needed, elimina ng redundant computa ons.

b) **Flow of Control Op miza on:**

Flow of control op miza on aims to improve program performance by op mizing the flow of
control statements such as branches and loops. It involves techniques like loop unrolling,
loop fusion, and loop interchange to minimize branch instruc ons and improve instruc on
scheduling.

Loop Unrolling: Expands loops by replica ng loop bodies, reducing loop overhead and
improving instruc on-level parallelism.

Loop Fusion: Combines mul ple loops into a single loop to reduce loop overhead and
improve cache locality.

Loop Interchange: Reorders nested loops to improve memory access pa erns and exploit
spa al locality.

Condi onal Branch Op miza on: Minimizes branch instruc ons by op mizing condi onal
expressions and reducing branch mispredic ons.

Instruc on Scheduling: Reorders instruc ons to minimize pipeline stalls and improve
instruc on throughput.
c) **Methods to Eliminate Unreachable Code, Load, and Store Data:**

1. **Unreachable Code Elimina on:** Analyze the program's control flow graph to iden fy
and remove code that cannot be reached during program execu on. This typically involves
sta c analysis techniques like reachability analysis and control flow analysis.

2. **Load and Store Data Elimina on:** Use compiler op miza ons like common
subexpression elimina on and copy propaga on to eliminate redundant loads and stores of
data. These op miza ons iden fy and replace redundant memory accesses with previously
computed values, reducing memory traffic and improving program efficiency. Addi onally,
techniques like loop invariant code mo on can hoist loads and stores out of loops when the
data is invariant across loop itera ons, reducing memory access overhead.

198.
(i) Discuss to detail about the role of Lexical analyzer with the possible error recovery
ac ons.
(ii) Describe in detail about issues in lexical analysis.
(i) **Role of Lexical Analyzer with Error Recovery Ac ons:**

The lexical analyzer is the first phase of a compiler responsible for conver ng the input
program into a sequence of tokens for further processing. Its role includes:

1. **Tokeniza on:** Iden fying lexemes (basic units of syntax) in the source code and
genera ng tokens (lexical units) represen ng these lexemes.

2. **Error Detec on:** Detec ng lexical errors such as invalid characters, illegal token
sequences, or misspelled keywords.

3. **Error Repor ng:** Providing meaningful error messages indica ng the loca on and
nature of lexical errors to aid programmers in debugging.

4. **Error Recovery:** Implemen ng strategies to recover from lexical errors encountered

during tokeniza on. Some possible error recovery ac ons include:

a. **Inser on:** Inser ng missing characters or tokens to correct the error and con nue
parsing. For example, if a semicolon is missing at the end of a statement, the lexer may insert
it to maintain syntac c integrity.

b. **Dele on:** Dele ng extraneous characters or tokens to synchronize parsing. For

instance, if an extra semicolon is encountered, the lexer may delete it to con nue parsing the
next statement.

c. **Subs tu on:** Replacing erroneous tokens with correct alterna ves to maintain
syntac c validity. For instance, replacing a misspelled keyword with the correct one.

d. **Adjustment:** Adjus ng the lexical analysis process to skip over the error and resume
parsing from a more stable point, such as the start of the next statement.
 e. **Flagging:** Marking the error but con nuing tokeniza on to detect and report
subsequent errors.

Error recovery in lexical analysis aims to minimize the impact of errors on the compila on
process and facilitate the subsequent phases of the compiler.

(ii) **Issues in Lexical Analysis:**

1. **Ambiguity:** Ambiguous lexical structures, such as iden fiers that resemble keywords
or operators, can lead to parsing conflicts and incorrect tokeniza on.

2. **Efficiency:** Inefficient lexical analysis algorithms may result in slow compila on mes,
especially for large programs.

3. **Error Handling:** Inadequate error handling and recovery mechanisms can make it
challenging for programmers to iden fy and fix lexical errors.

4. **Regular Expression Complexity:** Complex regular expressions used for tokeniza on

may lead to increased lexer complexity and maintenance overhead.

5. **Unicode Support:** Suppor ng Unicode characters and mul -byte encodings

introduces addi onal complexity to lexical analysis, especially for languages with diverse
character sets.

6. **Keyword Handling:** Proper handling of keywords in context-sensi ve languages

requires careful considera on to avoid misinterpreta ons or conflicts with iden fiers.

7. **Performance Overhead:** Lexical analysis overhead, especially in interpreted

languages, can impact run me performance and execu on speed. Efficient tokeniza on
techniques are essen al to minimize this overhead.

199. (i).Explain in detail about op miza on of basic blocks.

Op miza on of basic blocks involves enhancing the efficiency and performance of code
within individual sec ons of code known as basic blocks. Basic blocks are sequences of
instruc ons with a single entry point and a single exit point. The op miza on of basic blocks
typically occurs during the compila on process and focuses on improving the execu on
speed and resource u liza on of these blocks.

Techniques for op mizing basic blocks include constant folding and propaga on, common
subexpression elimina on (CSE), dead code elimina on, strength reduc on, loop-invariant
code mo on, instruc on scheduling, register alloca on, control flow simplifica on, and
inlining. Constant folding and propaga on evaluate constant expressions at compile me,
while CSE iden fies and eliminates redundant computa ons. Dead code elimina on removes
instruc ons that do not contribute to the final output. Other techniques aim to reduce
computa onal overhead, memory access latency, and control flow complexity within basic
blocks. By applying these op miza ons, compilers generate more efficient machine code,
leading to faster execu on and improved overall performance of the compiled programs.