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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Two small fixes to the Alloy section #96

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 16, 2024
Merged

Two small fixes to the Alloy section #96

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 5 additions & 4 deletions reports/spec3-alloy.tex
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
%! TeX root = report.tex

\section{\SpecThreeB{} in Alloy}\label{sec:alloy}
\section{\SpecThreeC{} in Alloy}\label{sec:alloy}

Once we saw that our specifications~\SpecThree{} and~\SpecFour{}
were too challenging for the \tlap{} tools, we decided to employ
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -49,9 +49,10 @@ \subsection{From \tlap{} to Alloy}
one sig GenesisBlock extends Block {}
\end{lstlisting}

In contrast to~\SpecThree{}, our Alloy specification does not describe a
state machine, but it specifies an arbitrary single state of the protocol. As
in~\SpecThree{}, we compute the set of justified checkpoints as a fixpoint:
Unlike~\SpecThree{} but similar to~\SpecThreeB{}, our Alloy specification does
not describe a state machine, but it specifies an arbitrary single state of the
protocol. As in~\SpecThree{}, we compute the set of justified checkpoints as a
fixpoint:

\begin{lstlisting}[language=alloy,columns=fullflexible]
one sig JustifiedCheckpoints {
Expand Down
Loading