Actually parse structured program elements #777
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This prints an informative error when the solver segfaults, but it doesn't continue on to process the remaining goals as it ideally would.
Instead of concatenating and parsing strings everywhere, this introduces a structured data type for representing the transformations on statement labels that can happen during Boogie elaboration and VC generation. It relieves clients from needing to parse the full unsat core element labels.
robin-aws
previously approved these changes
Sep 5, 2023
| // CHECK: Covered elements: cont_ens_abs$call_cont$ensures, xpos_abs$call_cont$requires, xpos_caller | ||
| // CHECK: Elements covered by verification: a_gt_10, a0, assert_a0, assert_r0, assumeFalse, call2_tee1, constrained, cont_assume_1, cont_assume_2, cont_ens_abs$call_cont$ensures, cont_req_1, cont_req_2, false_req, r0, sinv_not_1$established, sinv_not_1$maintained, sinv1$assume_in_body, sinv1$established, sinv1$maintained, sinv2$assume_in_body, sinv2$established, sinv2$maintained, spost, spre1, tee_not_1, tee0, tee0$call1$ensures, tee0$call2$ensures, tee1, tee1$call2$ensures, ter0, ter0$call1$requires, ter0$call2$requires, ter1, x_gt_10, xpos_abs$call_cont$requires, xpos_caller, xy_sum | ||
| // RUN: %OutputCheck "%s" --file-to-check="%t.coverage" | ||
| // CHECK: Proof dependencies: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Side note: if you're checking for the literal output line-by-line without anything expected in between, it's more strict and probably more efficient to use CHECK-NEXT: - https://github.com/stp/OutputCheck#check-next-regex
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ah, yeah, it would probably make sense for some (but not all) of these to be CHECK-NEXT. However, I don't imagine the lack of that would cause us to miss bugs in this case.
| @@ -21,8 +97,8 @@ | |||
| // RUN: %diff "%s.expect" "%t.coverage-p" | |||
| // RUN: %boogie -trackVerificationCoverage -normalizeDeclarationOrder:1 -prune "%s" > "%t.coverage-d" | |||
| // RUN: %diff "%s.expect" "%t.coverage-d" | |||
| // RUN %boogie -trackVerificationCoverage -normalizeNames:1 -prune "%s" > "%t.coverage-n" | |||
| // RUN %diff "%s.expect" "%t.coverage-n" | |||
| // RUN: %boogie -trackVerificationCoverage -normalizeNames:1 -prune "%s" > "%t.coverage-n" | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oof, I wish I had a concrete suggestion for how to catch this type of testing error. :P
| @@ -224,7 +224,7 @@ public override void FullReset(VCExpressionGenerator generator) | |||
| { | |||
| usedNamedAssumes.Add(resp.Name); | |||
| if (libOptions.TrackVerificationCoverage) { | |||
| reporter.AddCoveredElement(new LabeledNodeComponent(resp.Name.Substring("aux$$assume$$".Length))); | |||
| reporter.AddCoveredElement(TrackedNodeComponent.ParseSolverString(resp.Name.Substring("aux$$assume$$".Length))); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I take it these two lines were the fundamental bug?
robin-aws
approved these changes
Sep 5, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
PR #776 had a fundamental bug which this fixes.