85 refactor code #86
Open
85 refactor code #86
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…rsion. Need to review computation core to handle reflexivity in exclusive/interfere.
Fixed multi-allocated data for dependability view Need to review computation core to handle reflexivity in exclusive/interfere.
Fixed multi-allocated data for dependability view Rolling back to anti-reflexive version. Need to review computation core to handle reflexivity in exclusive/interfere.
Open
Open
…ting non-injective map.
Also add errors in groupMapReduce when non-merge is expected i.e (l:T,r:T) => {assert(l == r); l}
Updated problem generation to take into account that exclusive(a,a) is always true
Consider NotInterfere as an anti-reflexive endomorphism Updated problem generation to take into account that interfereWith(a,a) is always true
Updated problem generation to take into account that exclusive(a,a) is always true
Add an exporter providing a lightweight specification of a platform as a JSON file
ccoquand
reviewed
Dec 17, 2025
| r.hardwareOwner.nonEmpty && | ||
| l.hardwareOwner.exists(ol => | ||
| r.hardwareOwner.exists(or => finalInterfereWith(ol, or)) | ||
| r.hardwareOwner.exists(or => ol != or && finalInterfereWith(ol, or)) |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe "or" is not the best name for a variable, maybe natural indices might be a little less confusing ?
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok, I will move to ownerLeft and ownerRight
kevin-delmas
commented
Dec 18, 2025
| l == r || ( | ||
| transactionId(transactionByUserName(l)) == transactionId( | ||
| transactionByUserName(r) | ||
| ) |
Collaborator
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ccoquand This change is here to implement UserTransactionExclusive as a reflexive relation (as the ones in InterferenceSpecification)
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description
Please indicate whether this pull request [adds/removes/fixes/replaces] the [feature/bug/etc].
What type of pull request is this? (check all applicable)
Related Tickets & Documents
If possible ensure that you have provided in your commit message the issue id (
available here) this pull request fixes,
for instance to refer to issue #42 you can do:
git commit -m "solving issue #42 with ..."Check here
for more information
Added tests?
Added to documentation?
Do we need to update pml analyzer version?
Is this new version should be released as soon as possible?