-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
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
Print evaluator type and values of free variable of assertion failure predicate #1084
Open
vkuncak
wants to merge
3
commits into
epfl-lara:scala-2
Choose a base branch
from
vkuncak:eval-reporting
base: scala-2
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could we include the names into the evaluators instead of using the global variable
kind
? I'm afraid this requires changing Inox though to add a name field.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, I did not want to chage Inox this time. Maybe later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Instead of storing this in a global var, you could also compute the evaluator name to output inside the
EvaluatorComponent
based onctx.options.findOptionOrDefault(optCodeGen)
(especially since the property isn't really global).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't like checking the option since it's not telling me what the evaluator actually is, but what it should have been set to and there is complex initialization logic that determines that. Unfortunately I cannot use reflection and print dynamic class name e.g.with
.getClass.getSimpleName()
because somewhere in the code an anonymous class is created and the actual class name is lost.Another question: how do I make
--check-models
benefit from this?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Reflection should work, I think there's something like
getClass.getSimpleName
which isn't too mangled.Model checking currently takes place in Inox. The easiest way to get it to benefit from the new behavior would be to always disable
optCheckModels
in Inox (like here) and check models inside Stainless. The logic on the Inox side is here. Model checking in Stainless could actually be more powerful because we have access to the type checker, but you might need to be careful about running into loops.