Skip to content

Fixes for address expressions #6715

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

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 10, 2022
Merged

Fixes for address expressions #6715

merged 4 commits into from
Mar 10, 2022

Conversation

kroening
Copy link
Member

@kroening kroening commented Mar 8, 2022

This is a collection of fixes for the address constructor expressions.

  • Each commit message has a non-empty body, explaining why the change was made.
  • n/a 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).
  • 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 kroening changed the title Address expressions Fixes for address expressions Mar 8, 2022
: binary_exprt(
std::move(base),
base, // used for type, can't move
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We have that situation in quite a few of the constructors, and don't usually include such a comment. So I'm wondering whether it might just unnecessarily alert people?

@kroening kroening marked this pull request as ready for review March 8, 2022 18:22
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 8, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #6715 (06075c0) into develop (ee16d80) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
The diff coverage is 39.53%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #6715   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    76.80%   76.80%           
========================================
  Files         1589     1589           
  Lines       183658   183676   +18     
========================================
+ Hits        141056   141071   +15     
- Misses       42602    42605    +3     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
src/analyses/reaching_definitions.cpp 77.51% <ø> (ø)
src/solvers/flattening/bv_pointers.cpp 83.02% <0.00%> (-0.41%) ⬇️
src/util/pointer_expr.cpp 72.72% <0.00%> (+0.72%) ⬆️
src/util/pointer_expr.h 79.82% <0.00%> (-0.70%) ⬇️
src/analyses/dependence_graph.cpp 90.36% <100.00%> (+0.68%) ⬆️
src/analyses/dependence_graph.h 85.13% <100.00%> (+1.31%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update f34b180...06075c0. Read the comment docs.

kroening and others added 4 commits March 9, 2022 15:55
This moves the conversion of field_address and element_address expressions
to the right place.
This fixes the constructor of field_address_exprt.
The constructor now asserts that the base expression is a pointer, not an array.
The validator for object_address_exprt now asserts the correct number of
operands.
@kroening kroening force-pushed the address_expressions branch from 4ecdb60 to 06075c0 Compare March 9, 2022 15:55
@kroening kroening merged commit 29799b4 into develop Mar 10, 2022
@kroening kroening deleted the address_expressions branch March 10, 2022 07:47
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.

4 participants