Missing code in complex.py example #5
Comments
|
This has been fixed some time ago in the unstable branch (by removing the function), but the unstable branch hasn't been released into master yet. |
wintersteiger
referenced
this issue
in wintersteiger/z3
Aug 4, 2015
wintersteiger
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 3, 2016
Fix bug in OCaml API where double values have been wrapped incorrectly.
NikolajBjorner
referenced
this issue
in NikolajBjorner/z3
May 22, 2016
making theory_lra work with QF_UFLRA
Closed
This was referenced Jan 31, 2018
agurfinkel
referenced
this issue
in agurfinkel/z3
May 14, 2018
Closed
Closed
Merged
mtzguido
added a commit
to mtzguido/z3
that referenced
this issue
Jun 23, 2023
…junctions After introducing the rewriter.sort_disjunctions option, I noticed a segfault in a Z3 run that was working fine for me. I traced the difference to a slight discrepancy between the first patch I submitted and the one we ended up merging: my first version would skip sorting the disjuncts in mk_nflat_core, but still return BR_DONE, while the patch in master returns BR_FAILED instead. This patch fixes the problem for me, and it makes slightly more sense to me to return a BR_DONE since, if `s` is true, some disjunct (e.g. a `false` or a repeat) might have been simplified away. However I don't fully understand this code. .. and I can't say I understand why the segfault happens. Perhaps that is a separate issue? This is the file to reproduce: https://gist.github.com/mtzguido/b7360c74d3d2e42d89f1bd9149ad26f6 Here's a stack trace of the failure, mk_nflat_or_core is not involved. ``` (gdb) where #0 0x0000555555b98497 in smt::context::get_lit_assignment(unsigned int) const () Z3Prover#1 0x0000555555b984cb in smt::context::get_assignment(sat::literal) const () Z3Prover#2 0x0000555555b98504 in smt::context::get_assignment(unsigned int) const () Z3Prover#3 0x0000555555ca83b8 in smt::context::get_assignment_core(expr*) const () Z3Prover#4 0x0000555555c9af5a in smt::context::get_assignment(expr*) const () Z3Prover#5 0x0000555555d7bd1d in (anonymous namespace)::has_child_assigned_to(smt::context&, app*, lbool, expr*&, unsigned int) () Z3Prover#6 0x0000555555d7c413 in (anonymous namespace)::rel_case_split_queue::next_case_split_core(ptr_vector<expr>&, unsigned int&, unsigned int&, lbool&) () Z3Prover#7 0x0000555555d7c589 in (anonymous namespace)::rel_case_split_queue::next_case_split(unsigned int&, lbool&) () Z3Prover#8 0x0000555555c9c1b7 in smt::context::decide() () Z3Prover#9 0x0000555555ca39fd in smt::context::bounded_search() () Z3Prover#10 0x0000555555ca30c2 in smt::context::search() () Z3Prover#11 0x0000555555ca273d in smt::context::check(unsigned int, expr* const*, bool) () Z3Prover#12 0x0000555555cb166a in smt::kernel::check(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#13 0x0000555555cb9695 in (anonymous namespace)::smt_solver::check_sat_core2(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#14 0x00005555560dc0c6 in solver_na2as::check_sat_core(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#15 0x00005555560d73f3 in combined_solver::check_sat_core(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#16 0x00005555560d34e3 in solver::check_sat(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#17 0x0000555556097b26 in cmd_context::check_sat(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#18 0x0000555556082ff0 in smt2::parser::parse_check_sat() () Z3Prover#19 0x0000555556084dc0 in smt2::parser::parse_cmd() () Z3Prover#20 0x00005555560861b6 in smt2::parser::operator()() () Z3Prover#21 0x00005555560757e6 in parse_smt2_commands(cmd_context&, std::basic_istream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, bool, params_ref const&, char const*) () Z3Prover#22 0x00005555555e8f68 in read_smtlib2_commands(char const*) () Z3Prover#23 0x00005555555ee6f6 in main () (gdb) ```
mtzguido
added a commit
to mtzguido/z3
that referenced
this issue
Jun 23, 2023
…junctions After introducing the rewriter.sort_disjunctions option (Z3Prover#6774), I noticed a segfault in a Z3 run that was working fine for me before the PR. I traced the difference to a slight discrepancy between the first patch I submitted and the one we ended up merging: my first version would skip sorting the disjuncts in mk_nflat_core, but still return BR_DONE, while the patch in master returns BR_FAILED instead. This patch fixes that problem, and it makes slightly more sense to me to return a BR_DONE since, if `s` is true, some disjunct (e.g. a `false` or a repeat) might have been simplified away. However I don't fully understand this code. ... and I can't say I understand why the segfault happens. Perhaps that is a separate issue? This is the file to reproduce: https://gist.github.com/mtzguido/b7360c74d3d2e42d89f1bd9149ad26f6 Here's a stack trace of the failure, mk_nflat_or_core is not involved. ``` (gdb) where #0 0x0000555555b98497 in smt::context::get_lit_assignment(unsigned int) const () Z3Prover#1 0x0000555555b984cb in smt::context::get_assignment(sat::literal) const () Z3Prover#2 0x0000555555b98504 in smt::context::get_assignment(unsigned int) const () Z3Prover#3 0x0000555555ca83b8 in smt::context::get_assignment_core(expr*) const () Z3Prover#4 0x0000555555c9af5a in smt::context::get_assignment(expr*) const () Z3Prover#5 0x0000555555d7bd1d in (anonymous namespace)::has_child_assigned_to(smt::context&, app*, lbool, expr*&, unsigned int) () Z3Prover#6 0x0000555555d7c413 in (anonymous namespace)::rel_case_split_queue::next_case_split_core(ptr_vector<expr>&, unsigned int&, unsigned int&, lbool&) () Z3Prover#7 0x0000555555d7c589 in (anonymous namespace)::rel_case_split_queue::next_case_split(unsigned int&, lbool&) () Z3Prover#8 0x0000555555c9c1b7 in smt::context::decide() () Z3Prover#9 0x0000555555ca39fd in smt::context::bounded_search() () Z3Prover#10 0x0000555555ca30c2 in smt::context::search() () Z3Prover#11 0x0000555555ca273d in smt::context::check(unsigned int, expr* const*, bool) () Z3Prover#12 0x0000555555cb166a in smt::kernel::check(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#13 0x0000555555cb9695 in (anonymous namespace)::smt_solver::check_sat_core2(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#14 0x00005555560dc0c6 in solver_na2as::check_sat_core(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#15 0x00005555560d73f3 in combined_solver::check_sat_core(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#16 0x00005555560d34e3 in solver::check_sat(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#17 0x0000555556097b26 in cmd_context::check_sat(unsigned int, expr* const*) () Z3Prover#18 0x0000555556082ff0 in smt2::parser::parse_check_sat() () Z3Prover#19 0x0000555556084dc0 in smt2::parser::parse_cmd() () Z3Prover#20 0x00005555560861b6 in smt2::parser::operator()() () Z3Prover#21 0x00005555560757e6 in parse_smt2_commands(cmd_context&, std::basic_istream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, bool, params_ref const&, char const*) () Z3Prover#22 0x00005555555e8f68 in read_smtlib2_commands(char const*) () Z3Prover#23 0x00005555555ee6f6 in main () (gdb) ```
NikolajBjorner
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 23, 2023
…junctions (#6779) After introducing the rewriter.sort_disjunctions option (#6774), I noticed a segfault in a Z3 run that was working fine for me before the PR. I traced the difference to a slight discrepancy between the first patch I submitted and the one we ended up merging: my first version would skip sorting the disjuncts in mk_nflat_core, but still return BR_DONE, while the patch in master returns BR_FAILED instead. This patch fixes that problem, and it makes slightly more sense to me to return a BR_DONE since, if `s` is true, some disjunct (e.g. a `false` or a repeat) might have been simplified away. However I don't fully understand this code. ... and I can't say I understand why the segfault happens. Perhaps that is a separate issue? This is the file to reproduce: https://gist.github.com/mtzguido/b7360c74d3d2e42d89f1bd9149ad26f6 Here's a stack trace of the failure, mk_nflat_or_core is not involved. ``` (gdb) where #0 0x0000555555b98497 in smt::context::get_lit_assignment(unsigned int) const () #1 0x0000555555b984cb in smt::context::get_assignment(sat::literal) const () #2 0x0000555555b98504 in smt::context::get_assignment(unsigned int) const () #3 0x0000555555ca83b8 in smt::context::get_assignment_core(expr*) const () #4 0x0000555555c9af5a in smt::context::get_assignment(expr*) const () #5 0x0000555555d7bd1d in (anonymous namespace)::has_child_assigned_to(smt::context&, app*, lbool, expr*&, unsigned int) () #6 0x0000555555d7c413 in (anonymous namespace)::rel_case_split_queue::next_case_split_core(ptr_vector<expr>&, unsigned int&, unsigned int&, lbool&) () #7 0x0000555555d7c589 in (anonymous namespace)::rel_case_split_queue::next_case_split(unsigned int&, lbool&) () #8 0x0000555555c9c1b7 in smt::context::decide() () #9 0x0000555555ca39fd in smt::context::bounded_search() () #10 0x0000555555ca30c2 in smt::context::search() () #11 0x0000555555ca273d in smt::context::check(unsigned int, expr* const*, bool) () #12 0x0000555555cb166a in smt::kernel::check(unsigned int, expr* const*) () #13 0x0000555555cb9695 in (anonymous namespace)::smt_solver::check_sat_core2(unsigned int, expr* const*) () #14 0x00005555560dc0c6 in solver_na2as::check_sat_core(unsigned int, expr* const*) () #15 0x00005555560d73f3 in combined_solver::check_sat_core(unsigned int, expr* const*) () #16 0x00005555560d34e3 in solver::check_sat(unsigned int, expr* const*) () #17 0x0000555556097b26 in cmd_context::check_sat(unsigned int, expr* const*) () #18 0x0000555556082ff0 in smt2::parser::parse_check_sat() () #19 0x0000555556084dc0 in smt2::parser::parse_cmd() () #20 0x00005555560861b6 in smt2::parser::operator()() () #21 0x00005555560757e6 in parse_smt2_commands(cmd_context&, std::basic_istream<char, std::char_traits<char> >&, bool, params_ref const&, char const*) () #22 0x00005555555e8f68 in read_smtlib2_commands(char const*) () #23 0x00005555555ee6f6 in main () (gdb) ```
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Not sure if this is correct (it surely doesn't run for me as-is), but the complex.py code example is missing the body for the function
pow@ line 69. I'd certainly love to provide a fix for this, but I have no clue what goes here :)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: