review the llvm undefined behavior submission

Paper: main.pdf Download main.pdf

Use the form below. Don't worry about the ratings, just fill in text for D, E, F, G.

==+== ASPLOS 2016 Paper Review Form
==-== DO NOT CHANGE LINES THAT START WITH "==+==" UNLESS DIRECTED!
==-== For further guidance, or to upload this file when you are done, go to:
==-== https://asplos16.hotcrp.com/offline

==+== =====================================================================
==+== Begin Review
==+== Reviewer: John Regehr <regehr@cs.utah.edu>

==+== Paper Number

(Enter paper number here)

==+== Review Readiness
==-== Enter "Ready" if the review is ready for others to see:

Ready

==+== A. Overall merit
==-== Choices: 1. Reject
==-== 2. Weak reject
==-== 3. Weak accept
==-== 4. Accept
==-== 5. Strong accept
==-== Enter the number of your choice:

(Your choice here)

==+== B. ASPLOS/interdisciplinary? (hidden from authors)
==-== Does the paper share ASPLOS's interdisciplinary focus?
==-== Choices: 1. No
==-== 2. Maybe
==-== 3. Yes
==-== Enter the number of your choice:

(Your choice here)

==+== C. Reviewer Expertise/Confidence
==-== Choices: 1. No familiarity with the area/low confidence in the review
==-== 2. Some familiarity with the area/medium confidence in the
==-== review
==-== 3. Knowledgeable in the area/high confidence in the review
==-== 4. Expert in the area/highest confidence in the review
==-== Enter the number of your choice:

(Your choice here)

==+== D. Paper summary
==-== Please summarize the paper briefly in your own words.

==+== E. Paper Strengths
==-== What are the paper’s strengths? Just a couple sentences, please.

==+== F. Paper Weaknesses
==-== What are the paper’s weaknesses? Just a couple sentences, please.

==+== G. Comments to authors

==+== H. Questions for authors’ response
==-== Specific questions that could affect your accept/reject decision.
==-== Remember that the authors have limited space and must respond to
==-== all reviewers.

==+== I. Comments to PC (hidden from authors)

==+== J. Novelty
==-== Choices: 1. Published before or openly commercialized
==-== 2. Incremental improvement
==-== 3. New contribution
==-== 4. Surprisingly new contribution
==-== Enter the number of your choice:

(Your choice here)

==+== K. Writing quality
==-== Choices: 1. Unacceptable
==-== 2. Needs improvement
==-== 3. Adequate
==-== 4. Well-written
==-== 5. Outstanding
==-== Enter the number of your choice:

(Your choice here)

==+== L. CACM Research Highlights nomination? (hidden from authors)
==-== Choices: 1. No
==-== 2. Yes
==-== Enter the number of your choice:

(Your choice here)

==+== M. Best paper award quality? (hidden from authors)
==-== Choices: 1. No
==-== 2. Yes
==-== Enter the number of your choice:

(Your choice here)

==+== Scratchpad (for unsaved private notes)

==+== End Review