Fix switch values that need an implicit upcast to find a struct member #158
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
romainbrenguier
pushed a commit
to romainbrenguier/cbmc
that referenced
this pull request
Apr 13, 2017
peterschrammel
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 11, 2017
Fix issue #158 (missing test cases)
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Upcasts might happen in the immediate argument to a switch statement (e.g. switch(((A*)x)->y) needing to become switch(x->superclass.y)). The Java bytecode typechecker already looked at some contexts for possible implicit casts like this; this adds switch arguments to the list. Fixes #154.