Skip to content

Add pretty printing for exprts in Catch assertions #5358

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

Conversation

hannes-steffenhagen-diffblue
Copy link
Contributor

Without a pretty printer exprt's just show up as ? in
catch assertions, which isn't very helpful.

Other things that could be similarly printed are typets and (especially) irep_idts. These pretty printers are added from the use_catch header because I can’t think of a good reason why we’d need to avoid that, and this avoids annoying ? output when you forget to include an optional header (and UB because we have incompatible template instantiations in headers that don’t include the pretty printer, although that’s unlikely to cause actual problems).

  • 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.

Without a pretty printer exprt's just show up as ? in
catch assertions, which isn't very helpful.
@hannes-steffenhagen-diffblue hannes-steffenhagen-diffblue force-pushed the feature/catch-pretty-print-expr branch from 2729707 to 997b51a Compare May 27, 2020 10:01
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented May 27, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #5358 into develop will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff            @@
##           develop    #5358   +/-   ##
========================================
  Coverage    68.17%   68.17%           
========================================
  Files         1170     1170           
  Lines        96540    96540           
========================================
  Hits         65819    65819           
  Misses       30721    30721           
Flag Coverage Δ
#cproversmt2 42.47% <ø> (ø)
#regression 65.38% <ø> (ø)
#unit 31.81% <ø> (ø)

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 d58ebd8...997b51a. Read the comment docs.

@NlightNFotis NlightNFotis merged commit 94c12bc into diffblue:develop May 28, 2020
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.

3 participants