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] Incremental verification

  • Subject: [Frama-c-discuss] Incremental verification
  • From: hollas at (Boris Hollas)
  • Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2010 13:17:49 +0200
  • In-reply-to: <20101006165800.34643a66@is010235>
  • References: <1286194386.7104.190.camel@iti27> <> <1286373428.7104.228.camel@iti27> <20101006165800.34643a66@is010235>

On Wed, 2010-10-06 at 16:58 +0200, Virgile Prevosto wrote:
> The parser itself has absolutely no way to know what has changed unless
> you give it the two versions of the code. And even in this case, the
> diff won't be that easy. In my opinion, the best way to handle that is
> within your favorite IDE (Eclipse, Emacs, Vim, ...), since it knows
> exactly which changes have been made. Chances are that it has already
> some notions of C, and as Pascal said, a rudimentary ACSL parser
> should be sufficient at this level.

In this case, what does a parser have to do and how must it interact
with Frama-C/Jessie? For example:

- if I change

void foo() {
  int i;
  i = 0;


void foo() {
  int i;

  j = 0;

does the parser have to detect that j is undeclared?

- if I change the contract of a function f that is used by several other
functions, does the parser have to detect which functions depend on f
and have Jessie verify each of them again, or is it sufficient to notify
Jessie of this change and Jessie will verify f along with its callers?