--- layout: fc_discuss_archives title: Message 16 from Frama-C-discuss on July 2020 ---
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[Frama-c-discuss] Nested loops



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 “\at(dst, Pre) == \at(dst, Here)” 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 –wp-timeout 600 had no effect.  My experience is that either the prover comes back quickly or it doesn’t 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 don’t 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>