Skip to content

Conversation

@thomasspriggs
Copy link
Contributor

To ensure it is working as expected when reused/built on top of.

  • Each commit message has a non-empty body, explaining why the change was made.
  • Methods or procedures I have added are documented, following the guidelines provided in CODING_STANDARD.md.
  • 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).
  • My commit message includes data points confirming performance improvements (if claimed).
  • My PR is restricted to a single feature or bugfix.
  • White-space or formatting changes outside the feature-related changed lines are in commits of their own.

To ensure it is working as expected when reused/built on top of.
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 5, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #6383 (c2c6c96) into develop (3c9339a) will increase coverage by 0.01%.
The diff coverage is 83.09%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           develop    #6383      +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage    75.91%   75.92%   +0.01%     
===========================================
  Files         1517     1518       +1     
  Lines       163936   164007      +71     
===========================================
+ Hits        124451   124526      +75     
+ Misses       39485    39481       -4     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
unit/solvers/smt2/smt2irep.cpp 83.09% <83.09%> (ø)
src/solvers/smt2/smt2_tokenizer.cpp 97.70% <0.00%> (+9.16%) ⬆️
src/solvers/smt2/smt2irep.cpp 100.00% <0.00%> (+10.25%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update a76195a...c2c6c96. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@TGWDB TGWDB left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks fine on the (discussed) understanding that this is testing a subset of the functionality and further tests for smt2irep will be added as more parsing is required for the new SMT2 backend.

@thomasspriggs thomasspriggs merged commit 01505ec into diffblue:develop Oct 6, 2021
@thomasspriggs thomasspriggs deleted the tas/exising_smt2_parser_tests branch October 6, 2021 10:00
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants