--- layout: fc_discuss_archives title: Message 15 from Frama-C-discuss on July 2020 ---
Sure, but I **did** remove the last assertion in the file, and the results are those I give in my answer (with the assertion, there are 13 proof obligations, not 12). Although, Iâm using the development version of Frama-C, which is 21.1+dev, and you are probably using 21.1 ; must be investigated further⦠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/20200728/5eed856a/attachment.html>