Disallows impure non-ghost calls in ghost code #755
Merged
Conversation
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
ArquintL
changed the base branch from
master
to
impure-calls-in-ghost-code-target-branch
jcp19
reviewed
May 14, 2024
src/test/resources/regressions/features/closures/closures-fail5-proofs.gobra
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/main/scala/viper/gobra/frontend/info/implementation/resolution/NameResolution.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/main/scala/viper/gobra/frontend/info/implementation/typing/MiscTyping.scala
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/main/scala/viper/gobra/frontend/info/implementation/typing/StmtTyping.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...in/scala/viper/gobra/frontend/info/implementation/typing/ghost/separation/GhostWellDef.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...in/scala/viper/gobra/frontend/info/implementation/typing/ghost/separation/GhostWellDef.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...in/scala/viper/gobra/frontend/info/implementation/typing/ghost/separation/GhostWellDef.scala
Show resolved
Hide resolved
…/ghost/separation/GhostWellDef.scala Co-authored-by: João Pereira <joaopereira.19@gmail.com>
…/StmtTyping.scala Co-authored-by: João Pereira <joaopereira.19@gmail.com>
Felalolf
approved these changes
May 22, 2024
src/main/scala/viper/gobra/frontend/info/implementation/resolution/NameResolution.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/main/scala/viper/gobra/frontend/info/implementation/resolution/NameResolution.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
src/test/resources/regressions/features/ghost_pointer/ghost-pointer-receiver-fail01.gobra
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...in/scala/viper/gobra/frontend/info/implementation/typing/ghost/separation/GhostWellDef.scala
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...in/scala/viper/gobra/frontend/info/implementation/typing/ghost/separation/GhostWellDef.scala
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
...in/scala/viper/gobra/frontend/info/implementation/typing/ghost/separation/GhostWellDef.scala
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Co-authored-by: Felix Wolf <60103963+Felalolf@users.noreply.github.com>
ArquintL
changed the base branch from
impure-calls-in-ghost-code-target-branch
to
tmp-branch-for-#747-#755-#766
ArquintL
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2024
ArquintL
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 24, 2024
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 PR depends on PR #747. Thus, this PR targets
impure-calls-in-ghost-code-target-branch(which corresponds to the branch used in #747) for review-purposes.This PR checks that ghost code does not contain calls to non-ghost impure functions. Note that calling non-ghost pure functions is fine due to the absence of side effects.
To support implementation proofs, this PR makes interface & closure implementation proofs non-ghost. Technically, we would need to distinguish between implementation proofs for a ghost or non-ghost member but due to the syntax restrictions for implementation proofs, we do not have to make this distinction (e.g., assignments are disallowed).
Fixes #37, Fixes #420