[Imprint][Data Privacy Statement][E-Mail]

View long theorem info. View the proof. Back to main index. View the specification. View theorem base summary, View theorem base listing, the used properties by spec, the dependency list, the symbol table,

Proof step 4 from proof inv-commit (previous step)

fo.inodes?, ro.inodes?, log-cons(log, fs), ri-cons(ri, fs), ri-inj(fi), ri-inj(ri) ⊦ ⟪if ri-cons(ri, fs) then { {choose as with as ∩ range ri = ∅ in fi := ri, fo := ro, fs := fs \ as, log := [], err := ESUCCESS; boolvar := true} or {fail#(; ; err); boolvar := ?}} else abort⟫ (ri-inj(fi) ∧ log-cons(log, fs) ∧ fo.inodes?)

Heuristic symbolic execution applied rule if positive right

And obtained the following new goals

Proof step 5:
ro.inodes?, fo.inodes?, log-cons(log, fs), ri-cons(ri, fs), ri-inj(ri), ri-inj(fi) ⊦ ⟪ {choose as with as ∩ range ri = ∅ in fi := ri, fo := ro, fs := fs \ as, log := [], err := ESUCCESS; boolvar := true} or {fail#(; ; err); boolvar := ?}⟫ (ri-inj(fi) ∧ log-cons(log, fs) ∧ fo.inodes?)

Rule argument

pos: right 1

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ ri-cons(ri, fs) → ( ri-cons(ri0, fs0) ↔ (∀ key. (key ∈ ri → ri[key] ∈ fs ∧ key-cons(key, fs[ri[key]])) → key ∈ ri0 → ri0[key] ∈ fs0 ∧ key-cons(key, fs0[ri0[key]]))); (ss)