--- layout: fc_discuss_archives title: Message 45 from Frama-C-discuss on February 2014 ---
2014-02-20 16:41 GMT+01:00 Jobredeaux, Romain J <jobredeaux at gatech.edu>: > Thanks for your reply Virgile, > > Indeed the syntax you suggest is valid, however, like you said, it looks like the assumptions and requirements on the nominal behavior, given in the function contract, are not available for the proof of the local contract :/. I am using WP -> Why3 -> PVS. Is that a 'bug'/not-yet-implemented-functionality of WP? > Indeed, this feature is not implemented (patches welcome). A crude work-around would be a small visitor that would propagate all assumes and requires of behavior nominal into the statement contract under a big \at(...,Pre). Rather ugly, but probably easier than to dive into WP's internals. Best regards, -- E tutto per oggi, a la prossima volta Virgile