--- layout: fc_discuss_archives title: Message 16 from Frama-C-discuss on July 2020 ---
It seems that there was a bug in 21.1 that has been fixed in the public GitLab version (issues #5 and #6, now closed, but private, sorry about that). Regards, L. > Le 27 juil. 2020 à 19:18, Tuttle, Mark <mrtuttle at amazon.com> a écrit : > > You are correct. The proof goes through with the file attached to the message. But the proof fails if the assertion â\at(dst, Pre) == \at(dst, Here)â at the end is deleted. The question was just why that assertion is needed for the proof to go through. Thanks! -Mark > > PS: Tomas Härdin asked about giving the solvers more time. Increasing the time to âwp-timeout 600 had no effect. My experience is that either the prover comes back quickly or it doesnât come back, but I could use some guidance on how much time to give the provers. > > > From: Frama-c-discuss <frama-c-discuss-bounces at lists.gforge.inria.fr <mailto:frama-c-discuss-bounces at lists.gforge.inria.fr>> on behalf of Loïc Correnson <loic.correnson at cea.fr <mailto:loic.correnson at cea.fr>> > Subject: [Frama-c-discuss] Nested loops > > I donât really understand the problem. Without any assertion, I get instant proof for all loop invariants: > > _______________________________________________ > Frama-c-discuss mailing list > Frama-c-discuss at lists.gforge.inria.fr <mailto:Frama-c-discuss at lists.gforge.inria.fr> > https://lists.gforge.inria.fr/mailman/listinfo/frama-c-discuss <https://lists.gforge.inria.fr/mailman/listinfo/frama-c-discuss> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/frama-c-discuss/attachments/20200728/b43ff5dd/attachment-0001.html>