introduce exprt::visit_pre #4543
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Member
kroening
commented
Apr 16, 2019
kroening
commented
- 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.
- n/a 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).
- n/a My commit message includes data points confirming performance improvements (if claimed).
- My PR is restricted to a single feature or bugfix.
- n/a White-space or formatting changes outside the feature-related changed lines are in commits of their own.
kroening
requested review from
allredj,
martin-cs,
peterschrammel,
pkesseli,
romainbrenguier,
smowton and
tautschnig
as code owners
added 4 commits
April 16, 2019 18:44
1) This offers a new interface for exprt::visit that uses a lambda. The suffix _pre clarifies that it does pre-order traversal. 2) The commit also introduces a template, which removes the redundancy between the const and non-const variant.
This avoids stack overflows.
This avoids stack overflows.
This avoids stack overflows.
kroening
force-pushed
the
exprt_visit_pre
branch
from
7912b60 to
58736e3
Compare
allredj
reviewed
Apr 16, 2019
There was a problem hiding this comment.
✔️
Passed Diffblue compatibility checks (cbmc commit: 58736e3).
Build URL: https://travis-ci.com/diffblue/test-gen/builds/108580350
tautschnig
approved these changes
Apr 17, 2019
|
Got to this one late, but I'd suggest any non-const visit is almost certainly a bad idea because it breaks all sharing -- use the depth iterator instead for that case. Const visit is good since there's no need to maintain the depth-iterator's stack if you're not going to make changes. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.