Skip to content
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

GNATStudio plugin #1

Closed
Jellix opened this issue Apr 3, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #43
Closed

GNATStudio plugin #1

Jellix opened this issue Apr 3, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #43
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Milestone

Comments

@Jellix
Copy link
Member

Jellix commented Apr 3, 2020

It could be handy to have a plug-in in GNATStudio so that the user can run the tool after a prove and see the information possibly interspersed with the actual source code.

Not clear yet, though, how the output should be displayed in the IDE.

@Jellix Jellix added the enhancement New feature or request label Apr 3, 2020
@Jellix Jellix self-assigned this Apr 3, 2020
@Jellix Jellix changed the title [Enhancement] GNATStudio plugin GNATStudio plugin May 29, 2020
@yannickmoy
Copy link
Contributor

IMO the simplest integration is to have the tool display a sorted list of all checks, starting with the unproved and then the proved ones, ordered by decreasing proof time. Possibly with a cut-off at 1s to not display proofs that are faster than that. If you use the "file:line:col msg" format, the standard output parser in GNAT Studio will readily add links to the source code.

Something more involved would require plotting the proof effort. I can imagine having a 2-dimensional plot with steps/time as axes and a dot for each check, on which you can zoom and click on a given dot to bring you to the corresponding line-of-code and message. Just a product of imagination right now, as it probably requires extending Cairo binding in GNAT Studio. Not sure it's worth the effort, compared to the simple integration above.

@Jellix Jellix added this to the V1.1.0 milestone Jun 18, 2020
@Jellix Jellix linked a pull request Jun 21, 2020 that will close this issue
@Jellix Jellix closed this as completed Jun 21, 2020
@Jellix
Copy link
Member Author

Jellix commented Jun 21, 2020

The plug-in sorts the times in a binary logarithmic manner, so there is possibly no need for using the --cut-off parameter.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants