You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 3, 2021. It is now read-only.
There is a inconsistency in the verify this reach-ability category:
There are three benchmark tasks which were split into a safe version and a incorrect version with bug fixes in #851:
In #923 the unreach-call verdicts of the safe tasks were changed to false. We now have a safe version and a incorrect version of each task there both have a false verdict. I don't think this matches the intention of the author, who provided bug fixes for the original tasks.
If I'm right, I would propose to undo the verdict changes and rather fix the tasks if possible. @gernst could you please have a look, what do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sorry for my late reply. I recall there was some discussion about these tasks, specifically, that the original version had errors despite the goal of being correct. Hence, I support your proposal, but I don't know really where these bugs were, but memcleanup is of course not valid.
Not sure whether memcleanup should be considered, a recursive free method for trees might cause the unreach-call task to become harder as well, which I would not like.
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
There is a inconsistency in the verify this reach-ability category:
There are three benchmark tasks which were split into a safe version and a incorrect version with bug fixes in #851:
In #923 the unreach-call verdicts of the safe tasks were changed to
false
. We now have a safe version and a incorrect version of each task there both have afalse
verdict. I don't think this matches the intention of the author, who provided bug fixes for the original tasks.If I'm right, I would propose to undo the verdict changes and rather fix the tasks if possible.
@gernst could you please have a look, what do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: