ID0001961: **This issue was created automatically from Mantis Issue 1961. Further discussion may take place here.** --- | **Id** | **Project** | **Category** | **View** | **Due Date** | **Updated** | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | ID0001961 | Frama-Clang | Plug-in > clang | public | 2014-11-10 | 2015-02-16 | | | | | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | **Reporter** | Jochen | **Assigned To** | virgile | **Resolution** | duplicate | | **Priority** | normal | **Severity** | minor | **Reproducibility** | always | | **Platform** | Neon-20140301+dev-stance | **OS** | - | **OS Version** | xubuntu-cfe13.10 | | **Product Version** | - | **Target Version** | - | **Fixed in Version** | - | ### Description : The assertion in line 18 can't be proven by WP/Alt-Ergo. However, if the explicit constructor call is uncommented in line 16, the assertion (and any other obligation) can be proven. The .mlw files given to Alt-Ergo differ just in one precondition to the goal, viz. "(84 = (2 * i))", which is the translation of the destructor's contract (intentionally phrased in a clumsy way to prevent qed from proving the assertion). Both files are attached for convenience. This problem is very likely the reason for issue #1738, too. ## Attachments - [125.cpp](/uploads/d893d9e2adc21c127a9de88f0c7b3e7d/125.cpp) - [impl.mlw](/uploads/9c7935b5e5c45dbbeeb1d46aaad07913/impl.mlw) - [expl.mlw](/uploads/adde3ddc6b5101b2a3f4044702eccb4d/expl.mlw)