Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add minor comments #93

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Dec 17, 2024
Merged

Add minor comments #93

merged 4 commits into from
Dec 17, 2024

Conversation

saltiniroberto
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

reports/spec1.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
reports/spec1.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
reports/discussion.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
reports/spec2.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -14,6 +14,7 @@ \section{\SpecThreeB{} in Alloy}\label{sec:alloy}
restrict the number of checkpoints and votes to 5 and 12, respectively.
Although we introduced similar restrictions with Apalache, Alloy has even
finer level of parameter tuning.
\rs{Is there some inherent limitation of Apalache that we should discuss?}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No inherent limitation per se, there is just no finer-grained control that Apalache implements or exposes right now. We actually mention it as a possible extension in §1.3.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, we touched upon that in para 1.3. Beyond that, it is hard to explain the difference without explaining the technique implemented by Alloy.

reports/spec3-alloy.tex Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
reports/spec4b.tex Show resolved Hide resolved
reports/spec4b.tex Show resolved Hide resolved
thpani added a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 17, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@konnov konnov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think the proposed changes are good. We should probably drop the remaining footnote.

@konnov konnov merged commit 8cf1883 into roberto/minor-fixes Dec 17, 2024
1 check passed
@thpani thpani deleted the minor-comments branch December 17, 2024 09:03
@thpani thpani restored the minor-comments branch December 17, 2024 10:29
@saltiniroberto
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@konnov @thpani
I am a bit confused about what happened to this PR :)
It seems that this has been merged into roberto/minor-fixes (after roberto/minor-fixes was merged into main) but has yet to be merged into main.

If we want to marge this PR into main, we need to remove the pending comments, but I am not sure whether they have been resolved in other PRs.

@saltiniroberto saltiniroberto mentioned this pull request Dec 18, 2024
@saltiniroberto
Copy link
Collaborator Author

See #100

@thpani thpani deleted the minor-comments branch December 18, 2024 07:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants