runtimeverification / runtimeverification/haskell-backend
Function in top condition not evaluated
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
set-simplification
- Dominant language
- Haskell
- Stars
- 224
- Forks
- 43
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
We have the following function definition:
syntax Bool ::= KItem "#in" Set [function, functional]
rule X #in SetItem(A) => X ==K A [simplification]
rule X #in SetItem(A) SetItem(B) S:Set => X #in SetItem(A) orBool X #in (SetItem(B) S) [simplification]
rule X #in .Set => false [simplification]
And the following term in top-level condition:
#And
#Not ( {
notBool ( ( b"095ea7b3" ++ #buf ( 32 , ?ACCT1 ) ) ++ #buf ( 32 , ?SYMB_INT ) #in SetItem ( b"2387e975" )
SetItem ( b"c2d56e53" )
SetItem ( b"f02ce809" ) )
#Equals
true
} )
Why it is not evaluated?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
No source file, test, or entry point is named. Reproduce the supplied top-level condition and inspect the evaluation or simplification path for #in and its function rules. Done means establishing and clearly explaining why the condition is not evaluated, including whether the behavior is a defect or a limitation.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- haskell
- Domain
- backend
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 30/100