Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Refactor AssumptionStack #1169

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Jan 24, 2024
Merged

Refactor AssumptionStack #1169

merged 9 commits into from
Jan 24, 2024

Conversation

langston-barrett
Copy link
Contributor

Towards #1168.

@langston-barrett langston-barrett self-assigned this Jan 24, 2024
@langston-barrett
Copy link
Contributor Author

It seems that pushing/popping operations are exposed via IsSymBackend. Ideally, we would only expose operations that automatically enforce the desired matching push/pop condition (basically, just an operation like inFreshFrame). However, I'm not really familiar with the code that uses this API (Lang.Crucible.Backend.Online), and it's not clear to me how feasible it would be to refactor it to fit this pattern. However, I think the current PR is already an improvement, in that it makes it possible to avoid panicing functions in the public API.

@langston-barrett langston-barrett marked this pull request as ready for review January 24, 2024 20:50
RyanGlScott
RyanGlScott approved these changes Jan 24, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@RyanGlScott RyanGlScott left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Truth be told, I don't understand the frame-related code that well myself. But I agree that this is an improvement.

crucible/src/Lang/Crucible/Backend/ProofGoals.hs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
crucible/src/Lang/Crucible/Backend/ProofGoals.hs Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@langston-barrett langston-barrett merged commit 6157bbe into GaloisInc:master Jan 24, 2024
31 checks passed
@langston-barrett langston-barrett deleted the lb/assumption-stack-refactor branch January 24, 2024 23:01
RyanGlScott added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 11, 2024
@RyanGlScott
Revert "Merge pull request #1169 from langston-barrett/lb/assumption-…
3a334c9 
…stack-refactor"

This reverts commit 6157bbe, reversing
changes made to 02cd934.
@RyanGlScott RyanGlScott mentioned this pull request Mar 12, 2024
Open
RyanGlScott added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 12, 2024
@RyanGlScott
Revert "Merge pull request #1169 from langston-barrett/lb/assumption-…
bbdfddb 
…stack-refactor"

This reverts commit 6157bbe, reversing changes
made to 02cd934. This is primarily for the
benefit of ensuring that SAW's CI continues to work—see #1181 for the full
details.
RyanGlScott added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 12, 2024
@RyanGlScott
Revert "Merge pull request #1169 from langston-barrett/lb/assumption-…
af9c127 
…stack-refactor" (#1182)

This reverts commit 6157bbe, reversing changes
made to 02cd934. This is primarily for the
benefit of ensuring that SAW's CI continues to work—see #1181 for the full
details.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@RyanGlScott RyanGlScott RyanGlScott approved these changes

Assignees

@langston-barrett langston-barrett

Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@langston-barrett @RyanGlScott