Fix: Wording of assertion failure closer to semantics #3324

MikaelMayer · 2023-01-04T22:13:44Z

This PR fixes #3216
It completely replaces the wording ".... might not hold" by "could not prove..."

There are many reasons for that: We already use the wording "could not prove..." in other places and, funny enough, we (I) previously justified the introduction of "might not hold" by

fix: The error "assertion violation" is replaced by the better wording "assertion might not hold". This indicates better that the verifier is unable to prove the assertion.

If we replace "might not hold" by "could not prove", then "might not hold" does not requires explanation anymore.
I got also several complaints from the wording that, although softer than the previous "assertion violation", still indicates a point where Dafny is unsure what to do.

Moreover, the implication of "assertion might not hold" places the doubt on the programmer, which can be frustrating: If the programmer wants to find Dafny's counter-examples, he would be upset to discover they are incomplete, and that their assertion is actually valid. Saying "Could not prove" shifts the doubt from the programmer to Dafny by finally recognizing that the programmer might hit a limitation of Dafny and perhaps just need to introduce things to help Dafny prove its result. It also emphasizes the need to "prove" rather than the "make the assertion hold".

Moreover, we did a first test of having "Could not prove" at the beginning of the error message, but this is uninformative as now most error messages would start by "could not prove", so we thought it was better to use the passive voice so that the kind of error can be spot in the first two words as usual.

Here are the messages that were replaced: (before/after)

Could not prove this assertion
this assertion could not be proven

This postcondition might not hold on a return path
this postcondition could not be proven on a return path

A postcondition might not hold on this return path
a postcondition could not be proven on this return path

the calculation step between the previous line and this line might not hold
the calculation step between the previous line and this line could not be proven

This loop invariant might not hold on entry
this loop invariant could not be proven on entry

A precondition for this call might not hold
a precondition for this call could not be proven

This is the precondition that might not hold
this is the precondition that could not be proven

Error: assertion might not hold
Error: assertion could not be proven

Error: function precondition might not hold
Error: function precondition could not be proven

could not prove this precondition.
this precondition could not be proven

I also made the error homogeneous by removing the first capital letter (errors messages are always prefixed by "Error: "), and remove the final periods because they are not needed in error messages that don't start with a capital letter (and can lead to confusion if the error message ends with a name), and could be added as post-processing if it was needed, e.g. in a report.
So I changed:

divisor is always non-zero.
divisor is always non-zero

This assertion holds.
this assertion holds

All preconditions hold for this call.
all preconditions hold for this call

This precondition holds.
this precondition holds

All postconditions hold for this return path.
all postconditions hold for this return path

This postcondition holds.
this postcondition holds

this postcondition could not be proven.
this postcondition could not be proven

This loop invariant holds on entry.
this loop invariant holds on entry

This loop invariant is maintained by the loop.
this loop invariant is maintained by the loop

This loop invariant might not be maintained by the loop.
this loop invariant might not be maintained by the loop

I also changed the UserGuide.md to reflect this wording, section verification debugging.

Will be merged after #3324

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the MIT license.

This PR fixes #3216 It completely replaces the wording ".... might not hold" by "could not prove..."

…ang/dafny into fix-3216-could-not-prove

atomb · 2023-01-04T22:19:25Z

Source/DafnyCore/Verifier/ProofObligationDescription.cs

@@ -297,7 +297,7 @@ public class AssertStatement : ProofObligationDescription {
      : $"error is impossible: {customErrMsg}";

  public override string FailureDescription =>
-    customErrMsg ?? "assertion might not hold";
+    customErrMsg ?? "Could not prove assertion";


Suggested change

customErrMsg ?? "Could not prove assertion";

customErrMsg ?? "could not prove assertion";

The convention in the rest of the messages is for them to start with a lower-case letter.

atomb · 2023-01-04T22:19:47Z

Source/DafnyCore/Verifier/ProofObligationDescription.cs

@@ -279,7 +279,7 @@ public class PreconditionSatisfied : ProofObligationDescription {
      : $"error is impossible: {customErrMsg}";

  public override string FailureDescription =>
-    customErrMsg ?? "function precondition might not hold";
+    customErrMsg ?? "Could not prove function precondition";


Suggested change

customErrMsg ?? "Could not prove function precondition";

customErrMsg ?? "could not prove function precondition";

The convention in the rest of the messages is for them to start with a lower-case letter.

atomb · 2023-01-04T22:20:53Z

docs/DafnyRef/UserGuide.md


 ### 25.6.1. Verification debugging when verification fails {#sec-verification-debugging}

-Let's assume one assertion is failing ("assertion might not hold" or "postcondition might not hold"). What should you do next?
+Let's assume one assertion is failing ("Could not prove assertion" or "Could not prove postcondition"). What should you do next?


Same case distinction here.

atomb · 2023-01-04T22:21:23Z

docs/HowToFAQ/ERROR_SeqComp.md

@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 ---
-title: "Error: function precondition might not hold"
+title: "Error: Cannot prove function precondition"


atomb · 2023-01-04T22:21:33Z

docs/HowToFAQ/onepage.md

@@ -2213,7 +2213,7 @@ To declare `formula` as _contravariant_ use `formula<-T>`. Then `formula<U>` is

 Type parameter characteristics are discussed in [the reference manual](../DafnyRef/DafnyRef.html#sec-type-parameter-variance)

-# "Error: function precondition might not hold"
+# "Error: Cannot prove function precondition"


davidcok · 2023-01-04T22:52:44Z

Source/DafnyCore/Verifier/Translator.cs

@@ -7233,7 +7233,7 @@ public ForceCheckToken(IToken tok)
      Contract.Ensures(Contract.Result<Bpl.Ensures>() != null);

      Bpl.Ensures ens = new Bpl.Ensures(ForceCheckToken.Unwrap(tok), free, condition, comment);
-      ens.Description = new PODesc.AssertStatement(errorMessage ?? "This is the postcondition that could not be proven.");
+      ens.Description = new PODesc.AssertStatement(errorMessage ?? "this is the postcondition that could not be proven.");


If you are going with the lower case style, then remove the ending periods as well

It is usually in a full sentence, though, of the form "Error: here is something in lowercase."

Yes, but the style in dafny elsewhere is predominantly to start with lower-case and not have a period, except when there are clearly multiple sentences. I'm not wedded to this style, and am open to a team discussion, but I'd like it to be consistent.

Ah, good point. I'm fine with leaving out the periods.

atomb

Looks good!

This PR is the companion of dafny-lang/dafny#3324 We established numerous times this year that the wording "might not hold" still incorrectly provides the feeling that the postcondition is incorrect. Rather than focusing on whether assertions hold or not, this PR fixes the status by focusing on the fact that the verifier was not able to prove the assertion.

MikaelMayer · 2023-01-06T22:03:19Z

Requires
boogie-org/boogie#676
to be merged

* Fix: Error wording closer to semantics This PR is the companion of dafny-lang/dafny#3324 We established numerous times this year that the wording "might not hold" still incorrectly provides the feeling that the postcondition is incorrect. Rather than focusing on whether assertions hold or not, this PR fixes the status by focusing on the fact that the verifier was not able to prove the assertion. * Fixed tests * proven => proved. Fixed tests * Fixed one more en->ed * Fixed a test * Fixed all the boogie files with messages inline * Fixed 3 more tests * Fixed last 2 CI errors * Support for the last two CI tests * Wording for invariants as well

- Added the trace of proof even in successes - Replaced intermediate "Could not prove" and "Did prove" by "Inside " to indicate this is just a trace - Use backticks to indicate quoted code - Better error message instead of "error is impossible: This is the precondition that might not hold" - First-class support of {:error} in hover messages.

…obligation descriptions.

# Conflicts: # Source/DafnyLanguageServer.Test/Lookup/HoverVerificationTest.cs

…t text Fixed CI tests

# Conflicts: # Source/DafnyLanguageServer/Language/DiagnosticErrorReporter.cs

… feat-better-error-messages # Conflicts: # Source/DafnyLanguageServer/Language/DiagnosticErrorReporter.cs

# Conflicts: # Source/DafnyCore/Verifier/ProofObligationDescription.cs # Source/DafnyCore/Verifier/Translator.cs # Source/DafnyLanguageServer.Test/Lookup/HoverVerificationTest.cs # Source/DafnyLanguageServer.Test/Synchronization/DiagnosticsTest.cs # Source/DafnyLanguageServer.Test/Various/ConcurrentInteractionsTest.cs # Source/DafnyLanguageServer/Handlers/DafnyHoverHandler.cs # Source/DafnyLanguageServer/Language/DiagnosticErrorReporter.cs # Test/allocated1/Allocated1.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/AutoContracts.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/AutoReq.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/BindingGuards.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/ChainingDisjointTests.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/CoPrefix.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/CoinductiveProofs.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Datatypes.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Definedness.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/DiamondImports.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Fuel.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/FunctionSpecifications.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/IndexIntoUpdate.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/InductivePredicates.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Inverses.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/LitTriggers.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Matrix-OOB.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/MultiDimArray.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/NestedMatch.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/OpaqueFunctions.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Parallel.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/PredExpr.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Predicates.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Protected.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Refinement.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/SmallTests.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Superposition.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Tuples.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/TypeAntecedents.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/TypeParameters.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/TypeSynonyms.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Unchanged.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/UnfoldingPerformance.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/one-message-per-failed-precondition.dfy.expect # Test/cli/zeroCores.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/AutoContracts.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/CoinductiveProofs.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/CustomErrorMesage.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/DefaultParameters.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Definedness.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Fuel.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/FunctionSpecifications.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Include.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/NoMoreAssume2Less2.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Parallel.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/QuantificationNewSyntax.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Refinement.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/RevealConsistency.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/SmallTests.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Superposition.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/one-message-per-failed-precondition.dfy.expect # Test/dafny2/SnapshotableTrees.dfy.expect # Test/dafny4/git-issue245.dfy.expect # Test/exports/OpaqueFunctions.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-1180b.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-2026.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-2299.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-2703.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-384.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-889a.dfy.expect # Test/hofs/Naked.dfy.expect # Test/traits/TraitOverride1.dfy.expect # docs/DafnyRef/UserGuide.md

…n to" where appropriate

# Conflicts: # Source/DafnyCore/Verifier/Translator.cs # Source/DafnyLanguageServer.Test/Lookup/HoverVerificationTest.cs # Test/allocated1/dafny0/AutoContracts.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/BindingGuards.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/ControlStructures.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/DTypes.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/DirtyLoops.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Fuel.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/FunctionSpecifications.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/MultiSets.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/OpaqueFunctions.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Parallel.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Refinement.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/SmallTests.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/TypeAntecedents.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/TypeParameters.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/one-message-per-failed-precondition.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/BindingGuards.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/ByMethod.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/ControlStructures.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/CustomErrorMesage.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/DTypes.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/DefaultParameters.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/DirtyLoops.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/ForLoops.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Fuel.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/FunctionSpecifications.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Include.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Includee.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Iterators.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/NoMoreAssume2Less2.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/OpaqueFunctions.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Parallel.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Predicates.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Refinement.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/SmallTests.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Twostate-Verification.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/TypeAntecedents.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/TypeParameters.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/one-message-per-failed-precondition.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/snapshots/Snapshots8.run.dfy.expect # Test/dafny1/InductionOptions.dfy.expect # Test/dafny2/SnapshotableTrees.dfy.expect # Test/exports/RevealProvideAll.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-1207.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-1812.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-1989.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-19b.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-2026.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-2299.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-2597-verification.dfy.expect # docs/OnlineTutorial/Lemmas.2.expect # docs/OnlineTutorial/guide.13.expect

Fixes #3686 - Added the trace of proof even in successes - Replaced intermediate "Could not prove" and "Did prove" by "Inside " to indicate this is just a trace - Use backticks to indicate quoted code - Better error message instead of "error is impossible: This is the precondition that might not hold" - First-class support of {:error} in hover messages. - BONUS: Not described in the issue: Hover support for `{:error}` in failed postconditions. Acts as a precursor to #3324 by harmonizing the change made in boogie "might not hold" => "could not be proved" in preconditions and postconditions ``` before: function precondition might not hold after: function precondition could not be proved before: the calculation step between the previous line and this line might not hold after: the calculation step between the previous line and this line could not be proved before: This postcondition might not hold on a return path. after: this postcondition could not be proved on a return path ``` The screenshots of the issue are now fixed w.r.t. the described errors. ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/3601079/222830841-be6e4157-fc1d-44b1-bf8c-603efe6146e4.png) ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/3601079/222830776-6edb430d-7765-4f52-860b-c5a8f4221f7e.png) With support for `{:error}` in postconditions ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/3601079/222868101-f2956c8e-8d54-4fe5-ad54-6ca7b02cd701.png) <small>By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the [MIT license](https://github.com/dafny-lang/dafny/blob/master/LICENSE.txt).</small>

# Conflicts: # Source/DafnyCore/Verifier/ProofObligationDescription.cs # Source/DafnyCore/Verifier/Translator.ClassMembers.cs # Source/DafnyCore/Verifier/Translator.ExpressionWellformed.cs # Source/DafnyCore/Verifier/Translator.cs # Source/DafnyLanguageServer.Test/Lookup/HoverVerificationTest.cs # Source/DafnyLanguageServer.Test/Various/ConcurrentInteractionsTest.cs # Source/DafnyLanguageServer/Handlers/DafnyHoverHandler.cs # Source/DafnyLanguageServer/Language/DiagnosticErrorReporter.cs # Test/allocated1/Allocated1.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Array.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/AssertBy.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/AutoReq.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Basics.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/BindingGuards.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Calculations.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/ChainingDisjointTests.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Char.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/CoPrefix.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/CoinductiveProofs.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Comprehensions.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/ComputationsLoop.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/ComputationsLoop2.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/ComputationsNeg.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/ControlStructures.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/DTypes.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Datatypes.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Definedness.dfy # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Definedness.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/DiamondImports.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/DirtyLoops.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Fuel.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/FunctionSpecifications.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/IndexIntoUpdate.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/InductivePredicates.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/LetExpr.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/LitTriggers.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Maps.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/ModifyStmt.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Modules1.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/MultiDimArray.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/MultiSets.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/NatTypes.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/NestedMatch.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/OpaqueFunctions.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Parallel.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/PredExpr.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Predicates.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Protected.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Reads.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/RealCompare.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/RealTypes.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Refinement.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/SmallTests.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/StatementExpressions.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/SubsetTypes.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Tuples.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Twostate-Functions.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Twostate-Verification.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/TypeAntecedents.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/TypeParameters.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/TypeSynonyms.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/Unchanged.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/UnfoldingPerformance.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/columns.dfy.expect # Test/allocated1/dafny0/one-message-per-failed-precondition.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/ArrayElementInit.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/ArrayElementInitERR.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/AutoReq.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Basics.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Char.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Comprehensions.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/ComprehensionsNewSyntax.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/DefaultParameters.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/DirtyLoops.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Fuel.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/FunctionSpecifications.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/GhostAllocations.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Iterators.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/LabeledAsserts.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/LabelsOldAt.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/LetExpr.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/MiscTypeInferenceTests.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/ModifyStmt.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/MultiSets.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/NoReferencesVerification.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/OpaqueTypeWithMembers.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Parallel.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/SmallTests.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/SubsetTypes.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/Twostate-Verification.dfy.expect # Test/dafny0/TypeParameters.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-1207.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-1989.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-2299.dfy.expect # Test/git-issues/git-issue-2605.dfy.expect # Test/hofs/Classes.dfy.expect # Test/hofs/Field.dfy.expect # Test/hofs/FnRef.dfy.expect # Test/hofs/Frame.dfy.expect # Test/hofs/Simple.dfy.expect # Test/hofs/Twice.dfy.expect # Test/triggers/splitting-triggers-yields-better-precondition-related-errors.dfy.expect # Test/unicodechars/dafny0/Char.dfy.expect # docs/DafnyRef/UserGuide.md

Looking for an approval of an active Dafny contributor

Fix: Wording of assertion failure to match what happens

8e7320a

This PR fixes #3216 It completely replaces the wording ".... might not hold" by "could not prove..."

MikaelMayer requested a review from atomb January 4, 2023 22:13

MikaelMayer and others added 3 commits January 4, 2023 16:14

Merge branch 'master' into fix-3216-could-not-prove

7acc626

Fixed case for "Could not"

3a1231e

Merge branch 'fix-3216-could-not-prove' of https://github.com/dafny-l…

edaefcc

…ang/dafny into fix-3216-could-not-prove

atomb requested changes Jan 4, 2023

View reviewed changes

MikaelMayer added 2 commits January 4, 2023 16:34

Lowercase

174e304

Passive voice so that important stuff is at the beginning

4350bcd

davidcok previously requested changes Jan 4, 2023

View reviewed changes

MikaelMayer and others added 3 commits January 5, 2023 10:22

Review comments

83395c3

Review comments

ec1d2e6

Merge branch 'master' into fix-3216-could-not-prove

a237a0e

MikaelMayer requested review from atomb and davidcok January 5, 2023 16:25

atomb previously approved these changes Jan 6, 2023

View reviewed changes

MikaelMayer mentioned this pull request Jan 6, 2023

Fix: Error wording closer to semantics boogie-org/boogie#676

Merged

MikaelMayer and others added 11 commits March 3, 2023 15:02

Support for {:error} on hover also on postconditions

c3c5516

Review comments

32cb31d

Review comments: Got rid of patches by integrating better with Proof …

05227f6

…obligation descriptions.

Merge branch 'master' into feat-better-error-messages

60ec8d9

Merge branch 'master' into feat-better-error-messages

0aac9fe

Merge branch 'master' into feat-better-error-messages

b136d48

Merge branch 'master' into feat-better-error-messages

8d2b241

# Conflicts: # Source/DafnyLanguageServer.Test/Lookup/HoverVerificationTest.cs

Fixed CI

b831daa

Ensured EnsuresDescription and PostconditionDescription share relevan…

d7a32d3

…t text Fixed CI tests

Ensure test is deterministic

be50afe

MikaelMayer and others added 8 commits March 10, 2023 09:11

Merge branch 'master' into feat-better-error-messages

89daeb4

Merge branch 'master' into feat-better-error-messages

9d8d505

Merge branch 'master' into feat-better-error-messages

ab390c5

# Conflicts: # Source/DafnyLanguageServer/Language/DiagnosticErrorReporter.cs

Last review comment

62abf54

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/feat-better-error-messages' into…

fea8f29

… feat-better-error-messages # Conflicts: # Source/DafnyLanguageServer/Language/DiagnosticErrorReporter.cs

Fixed latest merge.

dcbd72f

Fixed the merge

8e35c5d

MikaelMayer dismissed atomb’s stale review via 8e35c5d March 14, 2023 20:22

MikaelMayer and others added 7 commits March 15, 2023 14:49

Merge branch 'master' into fix-3216-could-not-prove

fca2d6d

Removed entirely "might not" and replaced it with "could not be prove…

f044fc7

…n to" where appropriate

Merge branch 'master' into fix-3216-could-not-prove

88dfa58

proven => proved like in Boogie

aaafad6

be proven => be proved entirely

9c9afeb

Fixing upcoming merge

d411ac8

MikaelMayer changed the title ~~Fix: Wording of assertion failure to match what happens~~ Fix: Wording of assertion failure closer to semantics Mar 17, 2023

MikaelMayer requested a review from atomb March 17, 2023 19:40

MikaelMayer added 3 commits March 17, 2023 14:51

Removed unwanted files

e4dea43

Removed wrongly committed project

1fbee86

Removed unused files

a70687b

MikaelMayer mentioned this pull request Jun 13, 2023

Feat: Better format in hover messages #3687

Merged

MikaelMayer and others added 3 commits August 17, 2023 11:22

Updated

3adc15b

Merge branch 'master' into fix-3216-could-not-prove

3796277

MikaelMayer added 3 commits January 24, 2025 08:35

Merge branch 'master' into fix-3216-could-not-prove

9974106

Fixed the build

172ae09

Updating 30 tests

c299831

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Fix: Wording of assertion failure closer to semantics #3324

Fix: Wording of assertion failure closer to semantics #3324

MikaelMayer commented Jan 4, 2023 •

edited

Loading

atomb Jan 4, 2023

atomb Jan 4, 2023

atomb Jan 4, 2023

atomb Jan 4, 2023

atomb Jan 4, 2023

davidcok Jan 4, 2023

atomb Jan 4, 2023

davidcok Jan 4, 2023

atomb Jan 4, 2023

atomb left a comment

MikaelMayer commented Jan 6, 2023

	customErrMsg ?? "Could not prove assertion";
	customErrMsg ?? "could not prove assertion";

	customErrMsg ?? "Could not prove function precondition";
	customErrMsg ?? "could not prove function precondition";

Fix: Wording of assertion failure closer to semantics #3324

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Fix: Wording of assertion failure closer to semantics #3324

Conversation

MikaelMayer commented Jan 4, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

atomb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

MikaelMayer commented Jan 6, 2023

MikaelMayer commented Jan 4, 2023 •

edited

Loading