Skip to content
GitLab
Projects
Groups
Snippets
Help
Loading...
Help
Help
Support
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Submit feedback
Contribute to GitLab
Sign in / Register
Toggle navigation
S
Stacked Borrows Coq
Project overview
Project overview
Details
Activity
Releases
Repository
Repository
Files
Commits
Branches
Tags
Contributors
Graph
Compare
Issues
0
Issues
0
List
Boards
Labels
Milestones
Merge Requests
0
Merge Requests
0
Analytics
Analytics
Repository
Value Stream
Wiki
Wiki
Members
Members
Collapse sidebar
Close sidebar
Activity
Graph
Create a new issue
Commits
Issue Boards
Open sidebar
FP
Stacked Borrows Coq
Commits
2d7ea383
Commit
2d7ea383
authored
Sep 17, 2019
by
Hai Dang
Browse files
Options
Browse Files
Download
Email Patches
Plain Diff
update README
parent
ddd96a4a
Changes
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Sidebyside
Showing
1 changed file
with
13 additions
and
10 deletions
+13
10
README.md
README.md
+13
10
No files found.
README.md
View file @
2d7ea383
...
...
@@ 20,7 +20,7 @@ You can also run them in Miri via "Tools"  "Miri", which will show a Stacked Bo
We have given informal proof sketches of optimizations based on Stacked Borrows
in the paper. To further increase confidence in the semantics, we formalized
these arguments in Coq (about 14KLOC). We have carried out the proofs of the
transformations mentioned in the paper:
example1, example2, example3
.
transformations mentioned in the paper:
`example1`
,
`example2`
,
`example2_down`
,
`example3_down`
.
### What to look for
...
...
@@ 41,15 +41,18 @@ The directory structure is as follows:
`sim/refl.v`
.

The main invariant needed for these properties is in
`sim/invariant.v`
.
*
`theories/opt`
: Proofs of optimizations.
For example,
`theories/opt/ex1.v`
provides the proof that the optimized
program refines the behavior of the unoptimized program, where the optimized
program simply replaces the unoptimized one's
`ex1_unopt`
function the
`ex1_opt`
function.
For this proof, we need to show that (1)
`ex1_opt`
refines
`ex1_unopt`
, and (2) all other unchanged functions refine themselves.
The proof of (1) is in the Lemma
`ex1_sim_fun`
.
The proof of (2) is the reflexivity of our simulation relation for wellformed programs, provided in
`theories/sim/refl.v`
.

For
`example1`
(Section 3.4 in the paper), see
`opt/ex1.v`
and
`opt/ex1_down.v`
.

For
`example2`
(Section 3.6) and
`example2_down`
(Section 4), see
`opt/ex2.v`
and
`opt/ex2_down.v`
.

For
`example3_down`
(Section 4) and
`example3`
, see see
`opt/ex3_down.v`
and
`opt/ex3.v`
.
For example, `theories/opt/ex1.v` provides the proof that the optimized
program refines the behavior of the unoptimized program, where the optimized
program simply replaces the unoptimized one's `ex1_unopt` function the
`ex1_opt` function.
For this proof, we need to show that (1) `ex1_opt` refines `ex1_unopt`, and (2) all other unchanged functions refine themselves.
The proof of (1) is in the Lemma `ex1_sim_fun`.
The proof of (2) is the reflexivity of our simulation relation for wellformed programs, provided in `theories/sim/refl.v`.
### How to build
...
...
Write
Preview
Markdown
is supported
0%
Try again
or
attach a new file
Attach a file
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment