Require explicit contract for --replace-call-with-contract #8739
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
tautschnig
requested review from
feliperodri and
remi-delmas-3000
as code owners
tautschnig
force-pushed
the
replace-call-with-contract-error
branch
3 times, most recently
from
fa3ad0a to
ed4f99b
Compare
Change --replace-call-with-contract to produce a hard error instead of a
warning when used with functions lacking explicit contracts. This
change addresses a soundness issue where CBMC would previously assume a
trivial contract automatically.
Users that really need a trivial contract with no constraints should use
````c
int my_function(int x)
__CPROVER_requires(1)
__CPROVER_ensures(1)
{
return x + 1;
}
````
Fixes: diffblue#8728
tautschnig
force-pushed
the
replace-call-with-contract-error
branch
from
ed4f99b to
2a32be7
Compare
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #8739 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 79.94% 79.94% -0.01%
===========================================
Files 1699 1699
Lines 187790 187786 -4
Branches 73 73
===========================================
- Hits 150133 150122 -11
- Misses 37657 37664 +7 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
feliperodri
approved these changes
Dec 4, 2025
Comment on lines
+620
to
+635
| // Check if the function actually has a contract | ||
| // If not, produce a hard error for soundness | ||
| const symbolt *contract_sym; | ||
| if(ns.lookup("contract::" + id2string(target_function), contract_sym)) | ||
| { | ||
| // no contract provided in the source - this is a soundness issue | ||
| // when using --replace-call-with-contract | ||
| throw invalid_input_exceptiont( | ||
| "Function '" + id2string(target_function) + | ||
| "' does not have a contract. " + | ||
| "When using --replace-call-with-contract, a contract must be " | ||
| "explicitly " + | ||
| "provided. If you need a trivial contract, please add explicit " + | ||
| CPROVER_PREFIX "requires and " CPROVER_PREFIX | ||
| "ensures clauses to the function."); | ||
| } |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't this check be place before get_contract?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
Change --replace-call-with-contract to produce a hard error instead of a warning when used with functions lacking explicit contracts. This change addresses a soundness issue where CBMC would previously assume a trivial contract automatically.
Users that really need a trivial contract with no constraints should use
Fixes: #8728