Skip to content

Pfeifer/proof mgmt includes fix#3757

Open
WolframPfeifer wants to merge 2 commits intomainfrom
pfeifer/proofMgmtIncludesFix
Open

Pfeifer/proof mgmt includes fix#3757
WolframPfeifer wants to merge 2 commits intomainfrom
pfeifer/proofMgmtIncludesFix

Conversation

@WolframPfeifer
Copy link
Member

This PR adds a small feature (for use in an ongoing case study by @FliegendeWurst) to the proof management command line tool: It allows using also the check for missing proofs when the specification in the source file contains dl_ escapes, and thus for loading them a project.key file is needed. At the moment, only this file (top-level in the proof bundle to load) is considered, the includes are read from there.

Type of pull request

  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • There are changes to the (Java) code

Ensuring quality

  • I made sure that introduced/changed code is well documented (javadoc and inline comments).
  • I have tested the feature as follows: Manually with a small example

The contributions within this pull request are licensed under GPLv2 (only) for inclusion in KeY.

@WolframPfeifer WolframPfeifer self-assigned this Mar 11, 2026
@WolframPfeifer WolframPfeifer added Feature New feature or request keyext.proofmanagement Module: keyext.proofmanagement labels Mar 11, 2026
@WolframPfeifer
Copy link
Member Author

@FliegendeWurst Can you check if this works for your case study? It should read the top-level project.key file in the bundle, and consider all the includes from there.

@wadoon wadoon added this to the NextMajor milestone Mar 11, 2026
Copy link
Member

@FliegendeWurst FliegendeWurst left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Works for my project 👍

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Feature New feature or request keyext.proofmanagement Module: keyext.proofmanagement

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants