Skip to content
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

Fix symbolic br_table #140

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Feb 2, 2024
Merged

Fix symbolic br_table #140

merged 4 commits into from
Feb 2, 2024

Conversation

chambart
Copy link
Member

Avoids sharing choice_i32 between different choices...
Also improve the performances by swaping the overflow test and the select_i32
Reverts the maze test to use a br_table

src/symbolic_choice.ml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@zapashcanon
Copy link
Member

Fix #116

@chambart
Copy link
Member Author

Rebased

@krtab
Copy link
Collaborator

krtab commented Jan 31, 2024

Fix #116

I discovered recently that autofix messages MUST be in the initial message unfortunately. I've manually linked the issue.

@krtab krtab linked an issue Jan 31, 2024 that may be closed by this pull request
@zapashcanon
Copy link
Member

@filipeom, is there a way to remove some variables from a model ?

@filipeom
Copy link
Collaborator

filipeom commented Feb 1, 2024

@filipeom, is there a way to remove some variables from a model ?

We can request the solver for the specific variables we need. With the argument Solver.model ~symbols, we can provide a list of symbols for which we want a model. By default, the solver generates a model for all symbols present in the path condition.

I been meaning to improve the way we generate output for models and testsuites to include only the symbols created through our symbolic API. This would also eliminate these auxiliary choice_i32 variables from being printed. If you want, I can attempt to implement this in a separate PR 😃

@zapashcanon
Copy link
Member

That would be nice, I created an issue so we don't forget about it, we can discuss it there

@zapashcanon zapashcanon merged commit 3c488af into main Feb 2, 2024
0 of 2 checks passed
@zapashcanon zapashcanon deleted the fix_br_table branch February 2, 2024 15:29
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.

something seems to be wrong with br_table
4 participants