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.

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

Mcsat api var order #478

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Nov 27, 2023
Merged

Mcsat api var order #478

merged 14 commits into from
Nov 27, 2023

Conversation

ahmed-irfan
Copy link
Member

This PR :

  • adds a method to set a variable ordering for making decisions in the MCSat search.
  • moves the variable ordering from the mcsat options to the solver context.
  • adds a api test case

@ahmed-irfan ahmed-irfan requested a review from disteph November 20, 2023 08:45
@coveralls
Copy link

coveralls commented Nov 20, 2023

Coverage Status

coverage: 65.14% (-0.004%) from 65.144%
when pulling 0dc69eb on mcsat-api-var-order
into 587bc83 on master.

-------------------------------

It is possible to give a variable ordering for the MCSat search --
this will make MCSAT to decide the variables in the given order. Note
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"...make MCSAT decide the variables..."
Can we specify in the doc whether the ordering is forced during the initial search phase only, or if it is persistent across backtracks (i.e. variable activities will not affect the order)?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

good point. I will add that info

@ahmed-irfan ahmed-irfan merged commit f1860fe into master Nov 27, 2023
24 of 26 checks passed
@ahmed-irfan ahmed-irfan deleted the mcsat-api-var-order branch November 27, 2023 22:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants