fix handling of bounds in conseq equiv phoare #837
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull Request Overview
This PR fixes the handling of bounds in the conseq rule for equivalence judgments in phoare logic by adding a side condition that requires bounds to be equal under the appropriate memory substitutions.
Key Changes:
- Extended
transitivity_side_condto accept optional bound parameters and generate bound equality conditions - Modified
t_bdHoareF_conseq_equivto accept and pass the second bound as a parameter - Updated the documentation comment to reflect the new bound equality requirement
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
Co-authored-by: Copilot <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This fixes #834 and #836.
The fix is to modify the side condition requiring a memory satisfying the left precondition to imply the existence of a right memory satisfying the right precondition and jointly satisfying the two-sided precondition. Now we also require the bounds to be proven equal under these two memories.
In most existing uses this part of the side condition should just simplify away since the bounds should be equal and usually don't depend on memories.
As a side effect this PR also permits uses of this kind of conseq to use bounds that aren't trivially equal, requiring equality to be proven instead.