Frama-C-discuss mailing list archives
This page gathers the archives of the old Frama-C-discuss archives, that was hosted by Inria's gforge before its demise at the end of 2020. To search for mails newer than September 2020, please visit the page of the new mailing list on Renater.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Frama-c-discuss] usage of Frama_C_memcpy
- Subject: [Frama-c-discuss] usage of Frama_C_memcpy
- From: Pascal.CUOQ at cea.fr (CUOQ Pascal)
- Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2009 13:33:35 +0100
- References: <1259838582.5991.14.camel@valin.toulouse.it.atosorigin.com><FC0686BB6178BC43B9DC035287A11A720DBE768CD3@SI-MBX12.de.bosch.com> <5EFD4D7AC6265F4D9D3A849CEA9219191AB261@LAXA.intra.cea.fr>
> You can still verify functions that call memset with this specification. Sorry, I was carried away by my own argumentation. In the case of memset and in the current state of Frama-C, you cannot easily verify functions that call memset either because there are again pointer casts at the call site. But you can give ACSL specifications to these functions, and hopefully, verify with Jessie the functions that call these. My point was that ACSL tries to be technique-agnostic and not to embed limitations that come with one tool or another, and that the verification done by Jessie is compositional, so when limitations are encountered, these remain contained to some part of the code base. Pascal
- References:
- [Frama-c-discuss] usage of Frama_C_memcpy
- From: stephane.duprat at atosorigin.com (Stéphane Duprat)
- [Frama-c-discuss] usage of Frama_C_memcpy
- From: Boris.Hollas at de.bosch.com (Hollas Boris (CR/AEY1))
- [Frama-c-discuss] usage of Frama_C_memcpy
- From: Pascal.CUOQ at cea.fr (CUOQ Pascal)
- [Frama-c-discuss] usage of Frama_C_memcpy
- Prev by Date: [Frama-c-discuss] usage of Frama_C_memcpy
- Next by Date: [Frama-c-discuss] Problem with memset
- Previous by thread: [Frama-c-discuss] usage of Frama_C_memcpy
- Next by thread: [Frama-c-discuss] Lemma from ACSL doc doesn't verify
- Index(es):