WIP: Supporting CVC5 #3990
Draft
WIP: Supporting CVC5 #3990
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
These are reserved.
implies/iff are apparently not standard SMT2, use the standard symbols.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR adds some some support to use CVC5 instead of Z3 (and removes use of some Z3-specific syntax).
This is VERY FAR from being ready and usable, and it's not clear whether it will be useful for a broad chunk of users. But it would be good to allow to switch solvers easily.
One has to pass
--ext cvcto use CVC5. At the moment, it seems like proofs involving reveal_opaque do not work, but I didn't look into why. A decent subset of files do pass.