Introduce ModelVarContext as a generalisation of ModelLookup and ModelFindVariables
#25
Conversation
This file contains 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
jorisdral
force-pushed
the
jdral/model-var-context
branch
from
8a724c0 to
71616aa
Compare
jorisdral
force-pushed
the
jdral/model-var-context
branch
from
71616aa to
1852cf8
Compare
Occurrences of `ModelFindVariables` and `ModelLookup` in the `InLockstep` class are replaced by the newly exposed `ModelVarContext`. A `ModelFindVariables` can be recovered from a `ModelVarContext` using the new `findVars` functions. A `ModelLookup` can be recovered from a `ModelVarContext` using the new `lookupVars` function. Since these functions can be recovered from `ModelVarContext`, existing tests are guaranteed to be adaptable to the new `InLockstep` API. Motivation: previously in the `InLockstep` class, member functions would be passed a `ModelFindVariables` or a `ModelLookup`, but never both. In practice this turned out to be too restrictive, because one might want access to both in the same function, see IntersectMBO/lsm-tree#431. For example, `arbitraryWithVars` was previously only passed a `ModelFindVariables`, but without a `ModelLookup` one can not filter these variables based on the (modelled) outcome of the corresponding actions. The use case for #431 in particular was to filter variables that reference stateful handles (e.g., file handles) for handles that are open. Because of this filtering, one can skew the action distribution to generate more actions on open handles. It is often more interesting to test actions on open handles than it is to test actions on closed handles, which will presumably always return the same error.
jorisdral
force-pushed
the
jdral/model-var-context
branch
from
1852cf8 to
a59f0e6
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Occurrences of
ModelFindVariablesandModelLookupin theInLockstepclass are replaced by the newly exposedModelVarContext. AModelFindVariablescan be recovered from aModelVarContextusing the newfindVarsfunctions. AModelLookupcan be recovered from aModelVarContextusing the newlookupVarsfunction. Since these functions can be recovered fromModelVarContext, existing tests are guaranteed to be adaptable to the newInLockstepAPI.Motivation: previously in the
InLockstepclass, member functions would be passed aModelFindVariablesor aModelLookup, but never both. In practice this turned out to be too restrictive, because one might want access to both in the same function, see IntersectMBO/lsm-tree#431. For example,arbitraryWithVarswas previously only passed aModelFindVariables, but without aModelLookupone can not filter these variables based on the (modelled) outcome of the corresponding actions. The use case for #431 in particular was to filter variables that reference stateful handles (e.g., file handles) for handles that are open. Because of this filtering, one can skew the action distribution to generate more actions on open handles. It is often more interesting to test actions on open handles than it is to test actions on closed handles, which will presumably always return the same error.