Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(engine) Avoid wrapping return in a tuple. #1056

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Oct 29, 2024
Merged

fix(engine) Avoid wrapping return in a tuple. #1056

merged 4 commits into from
Oct 29, 2024

Conversation

maximebuyse
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes #1044.

This fixes phase LocalMutation that was wrapping return expressions inside a tuple (to pass a state) but the state is lost in case of a return so we should not try to pass the state (otherwise it is not caught by DropReturnBreakContinue).

@maximebuyse maximebuyse self-assigned this Oct 28, 2024
@maximebuyse maximebuyse requested a review from W95Psp October 28, 2024 14:46
Copy link
Collaborator

@W95Psp W95Psp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Ah, that makes sense, thanks, looks great!

@W95Psp
Copy link
Collaborator

W95Psp commented Oct 28, 2024

The test failure looks suspicious though, do you have an idea why we have this change @maximebuyse?

@maximebuyse
Copy link
Contributor Author

The test failure looks suspicious though, do you have an idea why we have this change @maximebuyse?

I just pushed a fix. It was just a dumb mistake. Tests are passing now.

@maximebuyse
Copy link
Contributor Author

@W95Psp I fixed the issue with the typing of returns and the bug introduced for the proverif backend is now gone. Should we merge now?

@W95Psp
Copy link
Collaborator

W95Psp commented Oct 29, 2024

Fantastic!
Let me try on bertie

@W95Psp
Copy link
Collaborator

W95Psp commented Oct 29, 2024

Nothing changed in the generation of PV, but the verification doesn't work any longer.
The proverif TC is not under CI and relies on patches, so we can't say what broke it.
Let's go ahead and merge, it will be hard to diagnostic what broke bertie PV.
We need to (1) remove the patches and then (2) add CI there

@W95Psp W95Psp added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 29, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit d9c5568 Oct 29, 2024
13 of 14 checks passed
@W95Psp W95Psp deleted the fix-1044 branch October 29, 2024 11:15
@karthikbhargavan
Copy link
Contributor

@jschneider-bensch may want to look at why PV verification fails

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Regression from #393 - ? not working
4 participants