Refactoring code contracts implementation#6234
Conversation
feliperodri
commented
Jul 16, 2021
- 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.
Signed-off-by: Felipe R. Monteiro <felisous@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Felipe R. Monteiro <felisous@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Felipe R. Monteiro <felisous@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Felipe R. Monteiro <felisous@amazon.com>
Signed-off-by: Felipe R. Monteiro <felisous@amazon.com>
9fe27cc to
ba3cdb0
Compare
ba3cdb0 to
b3b2ee7
Compare
SaswatPadhi
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Overall LGTM, some minor comments below:
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #6234 +/- ##
===========================================
+ Coverage 67.40% 75.48% +8.07%
===========================================
Files 1157 1463 +306
Lines 95236 161245 +66009
===========================================
+ Hits 64197 121719 +57522
- Misses 31039 39526 +8487
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
Signed-off-by: Felipe R. Monteiro <felisous@amazon.com>
b3b2ee7 to
5d0ffe0
Compare
SaswatPadhi
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the refactoring! LGTM
martin-cs
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This kind of refactor is often hard to review so at best I think this is OK and I trust @feliperodri 's judgement here. There is a 40% reduction in code or so and it doesn't break the tests so that seems like a good start.