--- layout: fc_discuss_archives title: Message 70 from Frama-C-discuss on January 2014 ---
Hi, Actually, the verification condition generated for Alt-Ergo is of the form: *... (* Context: first-order axioms for memory model, .... *) ... goal g: false* Obviously, the VC is invalid if you condiser that the context is consistent. But in general, SMT solvers answer "unknown" instead of "invalid" when working on fragments of logic on which they are not complete. I tried other provers: cvc3 says "unknown", and cvc4 and z3 timeout after 10 seconds. Mohamed Iguernelala. Senior R&D Engineer, OCamlPro Research Associate, VALS team, LRI. http://www.iguer.info Le 24/01/2014 03:36, Dharmalingam Ganesan a ?crit : > Hi, > > Thanks for all responses. I'm not sure why the following code cannot considered invalid; I always get "unknown". > > Any comments? > > frama-c -wp -wp-rte non_sense.c -lib-entry > > > > int i = 0; > > /*@ > @ behavior BUG: > @ assumes i == 5; > @ ensures \result == -2; > */ > > int main() > { > if (0 <= i && i <= 10) > { > return -1; > } > > if (i == 5) > { > return -2; > } > > return 0; > } > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/frama-c-discuss/attachments/20140124/32f4695c/attachment.html>