Skip to content

CONTRACTS: loop info tagging utility functions #7632

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

Conversation

remi-delmas-3000
Copy link
Collaborator

Co-authored with @qinheping

Utility functions for loop contracts instrumentation, allowing to tag GOTO instructions with loop identifiers and loop instruction type.

Extracted from #7541, can only be tested once all features are in place.

  • 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.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 28, 2023

Codecov Report

Patch coverage has no change and project coverage change: +0.27 🎉

Comparison is base (47e6e92) 78.24% compared to head (45f155c) 78.51%.

❗ Current head 45f155c differs from pull request most recent head 797062a. Consider uploading reports for the commit 797062a to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #7632      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    78.24%   78.51%   +0.27%     
===========================================
  Files         1674     1674              
  Lines       191935   191956      +21     
===========================================
+ Hits        150176   150723     +547     
+ Misses       41759    41233     -526     

see 36 files with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@remi-delmas-3000 remi-delmas-3000 force-pushed the contracts-loop-tagging branch from 4e4c624 to 45f155c Compare April 1, 2023 15:23
Copy link
Collaborator

@qinheping qinheping left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@remi-delmas-3000 remi-delmas-3000 force-pushed the contracts-loop-tagging branch from 45f155c to 40a69d7 Compare April 3, 2023 16:52
@feliperodri feliperodri added aws Bugs or features of importance to AWS CBMC users aws-high Code Contracts Function and loop contracts labels Apr 3, 2023
@remi-delmas-3000 remi-delmas-3000 force-pushed the contracts-loop-tagging branch from 40a69d7 to 797062a Compare April 6, 2023 15:17
@remi-delmas-3000 remi-delmas-3000 merged commit f6f7057 into diffblue:develop Apr 6, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
aws Bugs or features of importance to AWS CBMC users aws-high Code Contracts Function and loop contracts
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants