Update documentations#567
Open
shaobo-he wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Contributor
Author
|
@zvonimir @michael-emmi @keram88, I think our documentations are very out-of-dated. I added some points about how we should update them. Any feedback? Btw, I should add Rust stuff into them, too. |
zvonimir
requested changes
Oct 21, 2020
| in its input programs. In its default mode, assertions are verified up to a | ||
| given bound on loop iterations and recursion depth; it contains experimental | ||
| support for unbounded verification as well. SMACK handles complicated feature | ||
| support for unbounded verification as well (REMOVE THIS). SMACK handles complicated feature |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why would you want to remove this?
| SMACK software verifier is run using the `smack` tool in the bin directory. | ||
| For a given input C/C++ program, the tool checks for violations of user-provided | ||
| assertions. SMACK has a number of command line options that can be used | ||
| assertions (MENTION GENERATED ASSERTIONS IN MEMORY SAFETY/OVERFLOW CHECKING). SMACK has a number of command line options that can be used |
| for introducing nondeterministic (i.e., unconstrained) values, such as | ||
| `__VERIFIER_nondet_int` used in this example. | ||
|
|
||
| MENTION ASSERT/ASSUME |
| file is translated into Boogie code, which is in turn passed to the chosen back-end | ||
| verifier. | ||
|
|
||
| EXAMPLE ON MEMORY SAFETY |
shaobo-he
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 5, 2026
Following the documentation outline in #567, flesh out docs/running.md with new sections on understanding SMACK's output and counterexample traces, checking memory safety and integer overflow, verifying multi-file and whole-program bitcode, and selecting the verification back-end and solver. Every command and output shown was verified against a real SMACK run. While documenting assertions, discovered that assert() requires including <assert.h> (SMACK ships its own that routes assert to the verifier). The examples/simple and examples/simple-project programs omitted it, so their assertions were silently ignored (injecting assert(0) still reported "no errors"). Add the include to both examples and document the requirement, including the "implicit declaration of function 'assert'" pitfall. Also drop the now-obsolete whole-program-llvm reference and remove the stale "experimental unbounded verification" claim from the README. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
No description provided.