Skip to content

byte_extract lowering for complex_typet [blocks: #2068] #4228

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 20, 2019

Conversation

tautschnig
Copy link
Collaborator

It may have worked before via the fallback to flattening of the entire
expression to a bitvector, but let's be on the safe side and construct
appropriate expressions.

  • Each commit message has a non-empty body, explaining why the change was made.
  • n/a Methods or procedures I have added are documented, following the guidelines provided in CODING_STANDARD.md.
  • n/a The feature or user visible behaviour I have added or modified has been documented in the User Guide in doc/cprover-manual/
  • Regression or unit tests are included, or existing tests cover the modified code (in this case I have detailed which ones those are in the commit message).
  • n/a My commit message includes data points confirming performance improvements (if claimed).
  • My PR is restricted to a single feature or bugfix.
  • n/a White-space or formatting changes outside the feature-related changed lines are in commits of their own.

Copy link
Contributor

@allredj allredj left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

✔️
Passed Diffblue compatibility checks (cbmc commit: 5906993).
Build URL: https://travis-ci.com/diffblue/test-gen/builds/101421654

byte_operands.insert(
byte_operands.end(),
sub_imag.operands().begin(),
sub_imag.operands().end());
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

use move instead

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How should I use move here given that I need to append to a vector? (The first insert of course should use move as you suggest.)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

std::move(sub_imag.operands().begin(), sub_imag.operands().end(), std::back_inserter(byte_operands));

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'm now using std::make_move_iterator as the std::back_inserter would result in repeated reallocations. I hope that's ok as well.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes I think that's fine, otherwise you would have to do a reserve beforehand.

@tautschnig
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@romainbrenguier @smowton All comments addressed.

Copy link
Contributor

@smowton smowton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good except that all the test code is commented. Happy to commit if there's an immediately-following PR that brings the tests in; otherwise suggest doing some interim check that this code is at least exercised.

When the operand is a complex_exprt we can just extract the respective member.
@tautschnig
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I had to add two small extra commits, but with those we now actually have a successful live test, and not a commented-out one.

@tautschnig tautschnig self-assigned this Feb 19, 2019
It may have worked before via the fallback to flattening of the entire
expression to a bitvector, but let's be on the safe side and construct
appropriate expressions.
@tautschnig tautschnig force-pushed the byte-op-complex_typet branch from 4469493 to ec3ee8e Compare February 19, 2019 20:41
@tautschnig tautschnig merged commit 358d070 into diffblue:develop Feb 20, 2019
@tautschnig tautschnig deleted the byte-op-complex_typet branch February 20, 2019 02:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants