15283
|
1 |
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/html4/loose.dtd">
|
|
2 |
|
15582
|
3 |
<HTML>
|
|
4 |
|
|
5 |
<HEAD>
|
|
6 |
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
|
|
7 |
<TITLE>HOL/Hoare/ReadMe</TITLE>
|
|
8 |
</HEAD>
|
|
9 |
|
|
10 |
<BODY>
|
1335
|
11 |
|
5646
|
12 |
<H2>Hoare Logic for a Simple WHILE Language</H2>
|
|
13 |
|
5647
|
14 |
<H3>Language and logic</H3>
|
5646
|
15 |
|
|
16 |
This directory contains an implementation of Hoare logic for a simple WHILE
|
5647
|
17 |
language. The constructs are
|
5646
|
18 |
<UL>
|
5647
|
19 |
<LI> <kbd>SKIP</kbd>
|
|
20 |
<LI> <kbd>_ := _</kbd>
|
|
21 |
<LI> <kbd>_ ; _</kbd>
|
|
22 |
<LI> <kbd>IF _ THEN _ ELSE _ FI</kbd>
|
|
23 |
<LI> <kbd>WHILE _ INV {_} DO _ OD</kbd>
|
5646
|
24 |
</UL>
|
|
25 |
Note that each WHILE-loop must be annotated with an invariant.
|
|
26 |
<P>
|
|
27 |
|
|
28 |
After loading theory Hoare, you can state goals of the form
|
|
29 |
<PRE>
|
15659
|
30 |
VARS x y ... {P} prog {Q}
|
5646
|
31 |
</PRE>
|
|
32 |
where <kbd>prog</kbd> is a program in the above language, <kbd>P</kbd> is the
|
5647
|
33 |
precondition, <kbd>Q</kbd> the postcondition, and <kbd>x y ...</kbd> is the
|
5646
|
34 |
list of all <i>program variables</i> in <kbd>prog</kbd>. The latter list must
|
|
35 |
be nonempty and it must include all variables that occur on the left-hand
|
5647
|
36 |
side of an assignment in <kbd>prog</kbd>. Example:
|
5646
|
37 |
<PRE>
|
15659
|
38 |
VARS x {x = a} x := x+1 {x = a+1}
|
5646
|
39 |
</PRE>
|
|
40 |
The (normal) variable <kbd>a</kbd> is merely used to record the initial
|
5647
|
41 |
value of <kbd>x</kbd> and is not a program variable. Pre/post conditions
|
5646
|
42 |
can be arbitrary HOL formulae mentioning both program variables and normal
|
|
43 |
variables.
|
|
44 |
<P>
|
|
45 |
|
|
46 |
The implementation hides reasoning in Hoare logic completely and provides a
|
15659
|
47 |
method <kbd>vcg</kbd> for transforming a goal in Hoare logic into an
|
5647
|
48 |
equivalent list of verification conditions in HOL:
|
5646
|
49 |
<PRE>
|
15659
|
50 |
apply vcg
|
5646
|
51 |
</PRE>
|
15659
|
52 |
If you want to simplify the resulting verification conditions at the same
|
|
53 |
time:
|
5646
|
54 |
<PRE>
|
15659
|
55 |
apply vcg_simp
|
5646
|
56 |
</PRE>
|
5647
|
57 |
which, given the example goal above, solves it completely. For further
|
15659
|
58 |
examples see <a href="Examples.html">Examples</a>.
|
5646
|
59 |
<P>
|
|
60 |
|
|
61 |
IMPORTANT:
|
|
62 |
This is a logic of partial correctness. You can only prove that your program
|
|
63 |
does the right thing <i>if</i> it terminates, but not <i>that</i> it
|
|
64 |
terminates.
|
|
65 |
|
5647
|
66 |
<H3>Notes on the implementation</H3>
|
1335
|
67 |
|
5647
|
68 |
The implementation loosely follows
|
|
69 |
<P>
|
1335
|
70 |
Mike Gordon.
|
|
71 |
<cite>Mechanizing Programming Logics in Higher Order Logic.</cite><BR>
|
5647
|
72 |
University of Cambridge, Computer Laboratory, TR 145, 1988.
|
|
73 |
<P>
|
|
74 |
published as
|
|
75 |
<P>
|
1335
|
76 |
Mike Gordon.
|
|
77 |
<cite>Mechanizing Programming Logics in Higher Order Logic.</cite><BR>
|
|
78 |
In
|
|
79 |
<cite>Current Trends in Hardware Verification and Automated Theorem Proving
|
|
80 |
</cite>,<BR>
|
|
81 |
edited by G. Birtwistle and P.A. Subrahmanyam, Springer-Verlag, 1989.
|
|
82 |
<P>
|
|
83 |
|
5647
|
84 |
The main differences: the state is modelled as a tuple as suggested in
|
1715
|
85 |
<P>
|
5647
|
86 |
J. von Wright and J. Hekanaho and P. Luostarinen and T. Langbacka.
|
|
87 |
<cite>Mechanizing Some Advanced Refinement Concepts</cite>.
|
|
88 |
Formal Methods in System Design, 3, 1993, 49-81.
|
|
89 |
<P>
|
|
90 |
and the embeding is deep, i.e. there is a concrete datatype of programs. The
|
|
91 |
latter is not really necessary.
|
15582
|
92 |
</BODY>
|
|
93 |
</HTML>
|