Skip to content

GitLab

  • Menu
Projects Groups Snippets
    • Loading...
  • Help
    • Help
    • Support
    • Community forum
    • Submit feedback
    • Contribute to GitLab
  • Sign in
  • F frama-c
  • Project information
    • Project information
    • Activity
    • Labels
    • Planning hierarchy
    • Members
  • Repository
    • Repository
    • Files
    • Commits
    • Branches
    • Tags
    • Contributors
    • Graph
    • Compare
  • Issues 208
    • Issues 208
    • List
    • Boards
    • Service Desk
    • Milestones
  • Merge requests 1
    • Merge requests 1
  • Deployments
    • Deployments
    • Releases
  • Monitor
    • Monitor
    • Incidents
  • Packages & Registries
    • Packages & Registries
    • Container Registry
  • Analytics
    • Analytics
    • Value stream
    • Repository
  • Wiki
    • Wiki
  • Activity
  • Graph
  • Create a new issue
  • Commits
  • Issue Boards
Collapse sidebar
  • pub
  • frama-c
  • Issues
  • #855

Closed
Open
Created Nov 27, 2014 by Jochen Burghardt@burghardt

insufficient preconditions given to Alt-Ergo to prove assigns clause for mutable variable in contract of const method

ID0002000: This issue was created automatically from Mantis Issue 2000. Further discussion may take place here.


Id Project Category View Due Date Updated
ID0002000 Frama-Clang Plug-in > clang public 2014-11-27 2015-02-16
Reporter Jochen Assigned To virgile Resolution open
Priority normal Severity minor Reproducibility always
Platform frama-c-Neon-20140301+dev-stance OS - OS Version xubuntu-cfe13.10
Product Version - Target Version - Fixed in Version -

Description :

Running "frama-c -wp -wp-rte 171.cpp" on the attached program produces an obligation "typed__ZNK2clE3foo_assert_rte_mem_access" which is unprovable by Alt-Ergo. When the "const" is deleted in line 6, all obligations are provable.

The goal in the .mlw file is "... -> valid_rd(t, a, 1) -> valid_rw(t, shiftfield_F__Z2cl_x(a), 1)" with the "const", see attached file "_ZNK2clE3foo_assert_rte_mem_access_Alt-Ergo.mlw", and "... -> valid_rw(t, a, 1) -> valid_rw(t, shiftfield_F__Z2cl_x(a), 1)" without it, see file "_ZN2clE3foo_assert_rte_mem_access_Alt-Ergo.mlw". Since "shiftfield_F__Z2cl_x(p)" is defined as "shift(p,0)", the latter goal is trivially true.

Probably, the possibility that a "const" function well may modify a "mutable" variable has not been considered in proof goal generation.

Attachments

  • 171.cpp
  • _ZNK2clE3foo_assert_rte_mem_access_Alt-Ergo.mlw
  • _ZN2clE3foo_assert_rte_mem_access_Alt-Ergo.mlw
To upload designs, you'll need to enable LFS and have an admin enable hashed storage. More information
Assignee
Assign to
Time tracking