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] WP: verifying a particular proof obligation

Hello Jens,

Unfortunately , it not possible to do exactly what you what but, you can 
combine the use of one of the property label (here "unchanged" - notices 
that a property may has several labels) and the property categories you 
do not want (you have to list them - see the help given for -wp-prop to 
get the allowed category names).

So, -wp-prop=unchanged,- at invariant,- at assert
allow you to prove all properties having the label "unchanged" except 
invariants (that includes loop invariants) and assertions.

That is almost that you wanted !

Kind regards,
Patrick

Le 21/04/2020 à 09:58, Gerlach, Jens a écrit :
> Hello,
>
> The option -wp-prop allows to prove properties (annotations) with a particular name, say “-wp-prop=unchanged” .
> However, I often have several post conditions, loop invariant and assertion with the name ‘unchanged’ and
> I am not always interested to verify all of them but only a specific generated proof obligations.
>
> My question is if there is an option to verify a particular proof obligation by supplying its ‘internal’ names such as
>   typed_external_push_heap_ensures_unchanged  ?
>
> Regards
>
> Jens
>
> _______________________________________________
> Frama-c-discuss mailing list
> Frama-c-discuss at lists.gforge.inria.fr
> https://lists.gforge.inria.fr/mailman/listinfo/frama-c-discuss


-- 
Patrick Baudin, DILS/LSL, Bât. 862,
Point Courrier n° 174
Institut CARNOT CEA LIST,
CEA Saclay Nano-INNOV,
91191 Gif-sur-Yvette cedex, France.
tel: +33 (0)1 6908 2072