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] Problem with predicate and location labels

Le ven. 18 f?vr. 2011 15:28:58 CET,
"Boris Hollas" <hollas at> a ?crit :

> The following code verifies, but the specification
> unchanged{P,H}(\at(&this->a, P)); is quite clumsy.

OK, I see your point now. You're right, &this->a does not necessitate a
memory state: it's merely a matter of adding the offset of field 'a' to
'this'. In fact, I guess that it can be argued that taking the address
of any left value does not require a memory state: this address won't
change for the lifetime of the variable.This would void that your next

> Is &x automatically interpreted as \at(&x, Here) in this context?

Yes. In code annotation, when a memory state is needed to evaluate e but
not explicitely provided, it is interpreted as \at(e,Here).

Best regards,
E tutto per oggi, a la prossima volta.