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] Small function on buffer doesn't verify

  • Subject: [Frama-c-discuss] Small function on buffer doesn't verify
  • From: Julien.Signoles at cea.fr (Julien Signoles)
  • Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 09:31:39 +0200
  • In-reply-to: <1274167523.2155.15.camel@iti27>
  • References: <1273591300.4338.8.camel@iti27> <4BEF960F.6070300@inria.fr> <1274100093.2155.8.camel@iti27> <4BF13DCE.40802@cea.fr> <1274167523.2155.15.camel@iti27>
Boris Hollas a ?crit :
> On Mon, 2010-05-17 at 14:59 +0200, Julien Signoles wrote:
> 
>> It works if you insert a space between .. and BUFF_SIZE like this:
>>
>> 	/*@ requires \valid(msg+(0.. BUFF_SIZE));
>>
> 
> Jessie is still unable to verify the postcondition in my example. The
> relevant VC is integer_of_int8(select(char_P_char_M_msg_1_1, shift(msg,
> 4))) = 0.
> I use the Beryllium2 distribution.

Which provers do you use? I test Alt-Ergo, Simplify and Z3. The first 
tool is still unable to verify the postcondition. But the two other 
tools do the job. Combining several provers is often useful.

--
Julien