Skip to content

Add back two declarations needed for test-gen #4328

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

allredj
Copy link
Contributor

@allredj allredj commented Mar 5, 2019

These were removed in #4216.

This is temporary and these two declarations will be removed once https://github.com/diffblue/test-gen/tree/svorenova/goto-checker is merged (PR currently being prepared).

  • Each commit message has a non-empty body, explaining why the change was made.
  • Methods or procedures I have added are documented, following the guidelines provided in CODING_STANDARD.md.
  • The feature or user visible behaviour I have added or modified has been documented in the User Guide in doc/cprover-manual/
  • Regression or unit tests are included, or existing tests cover the modified code (in this case I have detailed which ones those are in the commit message).
  • My commit message includes data points confirming performance improvements (if claimed).
  • My PR is restricted to a single feature or bugfix.
  • White-space or formatting changes outside the feature-related changed lines are in commits of their own.

These were removed in diffblue#4216.

This is temporary and these two declarations will be removed once
https://github.com/diffblue/test-gen/tree/svorenova/goto-checker
is merged.
@allredj allredj self-assigned this Mar 5, 2019
@allredj allredj requested a review from thk123 March 5, 2019 11:29
Copy link
Collaborator

@tautschnig tautschnig left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure, if it helps...

@@ -193,6 +193,10 @@ class bmct:public safety_checkert

friend class bmc_all_propertiest;

// \todo remove these two declarations once test-gen dependency is fixed
bool cover(const goto_functionst &goto_functions);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How does adding the declaration (but not a definition) make a difference?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Heh... wondered the same thing - I think the answer is we provide the definition in the test-gen repo. I vaguely remember some dark magic where we linked a different bmc_cover.cpp because it had diverged too much on the old branch...

Copy link
Contributor

@thk123 thk123 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sure - it might help to put a JIRA ticket in the TODO so future finders of this TODO have something to refer to

@@ -193,6 +193,10 @@ class bmct:public safety_checkert

friend class bmc_all_propertiest;

// \todo remove these two declarations once test-gen dependency is fixed
bool cover(const goto_functionst &goto_functions);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

❓ How does adding a declaration without definition help? Because TG provides a implementation.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

But ... this isn't declared virtual?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No - TG compiles and links a copy of bmc_cover.cpp with the bmct::cover directly.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see - so it's technical debt coming to haunt you 👻

@allredj
Copy link
Contributor Author

allredj commented Mar 5, 2019

Copy link
Contributor Author

@allredj allredj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

✔️
Passed Diffblue compatibility checks (cbmc commit: bb64e19).
Build URL: https://travis-ci.com/diffblue/test-gen/builds/103192554

@allredj
Copy link
Contributor Author

allredj commented Mar 5, 2019

This won't work after all.

@allredj allredj closed this Mar 5, 2019
@allredj allredj deleted the add_back_bmc_covert_decl branch March 5, 2019 14:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants