Frama-C Bug Tracking System - Frama-C
View Issue Details
0001117Frama-CPlug-in > wppublic2012-03-12 11:042012-11-06 21:23
Jochen 
pherrmann 
normaltweakalways
closedfixed 
Frama-C Nitrogen-20111001 
Frama-C Oxygen-20120901 
0001117: addr_eq versus = and <> in generated axioms access_update, access_update_neq
I ran "frama-c -wp -cpp-command 'gcc -C -E -I.' -pp-annot -wp-rte -wp-proof alt-ergo -no-unicode -wp-warnings -wp-out ./out ftest.c" on the attached program and inspected the generated file "out/store_ftest_post_1_po_ergo.why". In the proof obligation for c-source line 14, the update operator a[i<-v] is used with e.g. addr_shift(s_0,0) substituted for i. In the axioms access_update and access_update_neq, arguments at position i are compared by built-in equality (and disequality <>). However, terms starting with "addr_shift" are usually compared by "addr_eq", e.g. in the translation of lemma l. I suggest to check whether the mentioned axioms should be weakened to: axiom access_update : (forall a:'a1 farray.(forall i:int.(forall j:int.(forall v:'a1.(addr_eq(i,j) -> a[i<-v][j]=v))))) axiom access_update_neq : (forall a:'a1 farray.(forall i:int.(forall j:int.(forall v:'a1.((not addr_eq(i,j)) -> (a[i<-v][j]=a[j])))))) If not, I suggest to check whether addr_eq is in fact the same as =, and to drop the former for sake of simplicity.
No tags attached.
c ftest.c (243) 2012-03-12 11:04
https://bts.frama-c.com/file_download.php?file_id=351&type=bug
Issue History
2012-03-12 11:04JochenNew Issue
2012-03-12 11:04JochenStatusnew => assigned
2012-03-12 11:04JochenAssigned To => correnson
2012-03-12 11:04JochenFile Added: ftest.c
2012-03-14 09:37corrensonNote Added: 0002766
2012-03-14 09:37corrensonStatusassigned => acknowledged
2012-03-14 10:09corrensonStatusacknowledged => assigned
2012-03-14 10:09corrensonAssigned Tocorrenson => pherrmann
2012-03-14 17:24pherrmannNote Added: 0002768
2012-03-14 17:24pherrmannStatusassigned => resolved
2012-09-19 17:15signolesFixed in Version => Frama-C Oxygen-20120901
2012-09-19 17:16signolesStatusresolved => closed
2012-11-06 21:23signolesResolutionopen => fixed

Notes
(0002766)
correnson   
2012-03-14 09:37   
Actually, there is no reason for keeping addr_eq instead of (=). Weakening the access-update axioms is not permitted by the usage of build-in array theory in alt-ergo. Also, I must mention that we are refactoring the models of WP and such cleaning is in progress.
(0002768)
pherrmann   
2012-03-14 17:24   
addr_eq is replaced by (=) as of svn 17556.