--- layout: fc_discuss_archives title: Message 49 from Frama-C-discuss on November 2009 ---
Hi, this is a bug in Why itself, and not a CVC3 bug. This will be fixed in the next Jessie/Why release. In the meantime, do not use CVC3 2.1, please. - Claude Rousset Nicolas wrote: > > Hello, > > I found that CVC3 version 2.1 says produces a false positive on some > VCs related to integer overflow safety. > > The simple program below is an example where the second integer > overflow VC is valid for CVC3 2.1: > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > typedef struct { int balance; } purse; > > //@ requires \valid(p); > > void credit(purse* p, int s) { > > p->balance += s; > > } > > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Version 1.5 of CVC3 seems correct on this example (?timeout? for the > same VC). > > - Nicolas > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Frama-c-discuss mailing list > Frama-c-discuss at lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/frama-c-discuss -- Claude March? | tel: +33 1 72 92 59 69 INRIA Saclay - ?le-de-France | mobile: +33 6 33 14 57 93 Parc Orsay Universit? | fax: +33 1 74 85 42 29 4, rue Jacques Monod - B?timent N | http://www.lri.fr/~marche/ F-91893 ORSAY Cedex |