- PPL-devel - BUGSENG Mailman

[GIT] ppl/ppl(devel): Do not include config.h in header files.
by Enea Zaffanella 03 Aug '17

03 Aug '17

Module: ppl/ppl Branch: devel Commit: 401c35278d369a90e41965b70a43e3b21bdb6ebf URL: http://www.cs.unipr.it/git/gitweb.cgi?p=ppl/ppl.git;a=commit;h=401c35278d36… Author: Enea Zaffanella <zaffanella(a)cs.unipr.it> Date: Tue Nov 15 10:31:49 2016 +0100 Do not include config.h in header files. --- src/thread_safe.hh | 2 -- 1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/thread_safe.hh b/src/thread_safe.hh index 0edc50c..8b1746b 100644 --- a/src/thread_safe.hh +++ b/src/thread_safe.hh @@ -24,8 +24,6 @@ site: http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/ . */ #ifndef PPL_thread_safe_hh #define PPL_thread_safe_hh 1 -#include <config.h> - #ifdef PPL_THREAD_SAFE #define PPL_TLS thread_local #else

1 0

ppl.hh in PREFIX/include?
by Ian Sweet 08 Jun '17

08 Jun '17

Hey everyone, I’m currently trying to build and install PPL 1.1 on a development virtual machine, running Debian. When I run: ./configure --enable-interfaces=ocaml --enable-cxx CFLAGS=-g the shared library, libppl.so etc., are successfully installed to /usr/local/lib (/usr/local is default PREFIX). However, ppl.hh is not being placed into /usr/local/include. Am I missing some configuration? Thanks, Ian Sweet

2 2

compilation error on newer (?) versions g++
by John Perry 20 May '17

20 May '17

Hello! I'm compiling a program that uses C++11 and encountered a number of errors, all of them apparently descending from this one: g++ -Ofast -std=c++11 -I/usr/local/include -L/usr/local/lib -c ppl_solver.hpp In file included from /usr/include/ppl.hh:25:0, from ppl_solver.hpp:21: /usr/include/ppl-x86_64.hh:10677:29: error: typedef ‘Parma_Polyhedra_Library::Checked::typeof’ is initialized (use decltype instead) typedef typeof(__mpz_struct()._mp_size) mp_size_field_t; If I take the compiler's advice and change typeof(...) to decltype(...) then the errors disappear. My compiler reports itself as $ g++ --version g++ (GCC) 6.3.1 20161221 (Red Hat 6.3.1-1) Copyright (C) 2016 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. However, I believe I have seen a similar error on a newer version of clang. The version of PPL is 1.1-14 which may be a bit old but I'm temporarily stuck with it for various reasons (I can go into details if you like but they really aren't pertinent). If you have fixed this problem in version 1.2 then it may still be useful to post it to the mailing list, as some people may encounter this issue. john perry

2 1

join-like operation
by Piotr Mardziel 26 Apr '17

26 Apr '17

Hello PPL developers; I'm finding myself in need of a particular join-like operation but I'm having trouble finding the necessary operations in PPL to make it work. I figure that the need for this operation would be common especially when implementing inter-procedural program analyses so I'm suspicious that I'm just missing the right terminology for it. Let me explain this operation: The setup has two polyhedra that model two sets of program variables with some variables shared but some variables not shared. For example: polyhedron A has the constraint x ≤ y, w = 1 polyhedron B has the constraint y ≤ z, w = 2 Note that each of those two only has 3 space dimensions but the are not intended to represent the same 3 variables, hence I gave them names to distinguish them. Thus we see that y and w is shared between the two polyhedra, whereas x or z are only represented in A or B respectively. Want I need is to join these two (thus requiring to first expand their dimensions to include all 4 dimensions) such that the result is a polyhedron C that "effectively" joins shared dimensions but preserves constraints over unshared dimensions, in this case I would like outcome C to have constraints x ≤ y ≤ z, 1 ≤ w ≤ 2 . The problem is that to expand each input polyhedron to 4 dimensions, one either has to embed or project and then follow it up with either join or meet. The join doesn't handle the x,y,z portion of this problem correctly whereas meet doesn't handle the w portion correctly. More technical, I need an operation over A, B to return a C with γ(A) ⊆ { π_{x,y,w} (e) | e ∈ γ(C) } γ(B) ⊆ { π_{y,z,w} (e) | e ∈ γ(C) } Where γ is concretization, and π_{...}(e) is a projection of a tuple e to a subset of its dimensions. Top trivially satisfies this requirement but the polyhedron {x ≤ y ≤ z, 1 ≤ w ≤ 2} also satisfies it and does so much more precisely (is minimal in terms of a concretized subset relation). Am I missing something obvious here? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Best, Piotr (Peter) Mardziel

2 1

[GIT] ppl/ppl(master): Work around the fact that __attribute__((weak)) does not work on 64-bit Cygwin.
by Roberto Bagnara 08 Apr '17

08 Apr '17

Module: ppl/ppl Branch: master Commit: 4e3d897f08b63ac7abc55d6a3621f84cdf1a69fe URL: http://www.cs.unipr.it/git/gitweb.cgi?p=ppl/ppl.git;a=commit;h=4e3d897f08b6… Author: Roberto Bagnara <roberto.bagnara(a)bugseng.com> Date: Sat Apr 8 16:38:17 2017 +0200 Work around the fact that __attribute__((weak)) does not work on 64-bit Cygwin. Thanks to Erik M. Bray. --- src/assertions.hh | 5 ++++- 1 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/assertions.hh b/src/assertions.hh index cceb7c9..63afbc1 100644 --- a/src/assertions.hh +++ b/src/assertions.hh @@ -98,7 +98,10 @@ site: http://bugseng.com/products/ppl/ . */ namespace Parma_Polyhedra_Library { -#if PPL_CXX_SUPPORTS_ATTRIBUTE_WEAK +// Note: __attribute__((weak)) does not work on 64-bit Cygwin. +// See https://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/16152 and links therein. +#if PPL_CXX_SUPPORTS_ATTRIBUTE_WEAK \ + && !(defined(__CYGWIN__) && defined(__x86_64__)) #define PPL_WEAK_NORETURN __attribute__((weak, noreturn)) #else #define PPL_WEAK_NORETURN __attribute__((noreturn))

1 0

Need help
by Amit Gurung 04 Apr '17

04 Apr '17

Dear Sir/Madam I see that there is very little example programs for beginners to start coding using PPL library, It would be of great help if you can kindly help me in this direction. I managed to write a simple code to create a PPL NNC_Polyhedron object named myPoly and assigned linear constraints (values of the form Ax <= b) where A is the coefficient matrix (boost library) and vector b is the bound values of the linear constraints. PPL_Polyhedron(math::matrix<double> A, std::vector<double> b, int sgn){ > int noOfCons = A.size1(); > int dim = A.size2(); > PPL::NNC_Polyhedron myPoly = PPL:: NNC_Polyhedron(dim); > for(int j=0;j<noOfCons;j++) > { > PPL :: Linear_Expression expr; > PPL :: Linear_Expression ex; > for (int i=0;i<dim;i++) > { > PPL :: Variable var(i); > PPL :: Linear_Expression ep=var; > ep.set_coefficient(var,A(j,i)); > if(i==0) > expr=ep; > else { > PPL :: Linear_Expression e(expr+ep); > expr=e; > } > } > if(sgn==1){ //sgn==1 for <= > PPL :: Constraint c= operator<=(expr, b[j]); > myPoly.add_constraint(c); > } else if(sgn==2){ //sgn==2 for >= > PPL :: Constraint c= operator>=(expr, b[j]); > myPoly.add_constraint(c); > } else if(sgn==0){ //sgn==0 for = > PPL :: Constraint c= operator==(expr, b[j]); > myPoly.add_constraint(c); > } > } > } I see that after this I was able to perform some of the operation such as *contains, poly_hull_assign, etc.* However, I observe that this works only for *INTEGER* coefficients values. *But it is incorrect when the supplied A and b values are of type double.* Could you please direct what am I missing? Or am I going on the wrong direction in this creation? I would appreciates for any help in this direction. Thanking you Regards -- Praying for your good health, *Amit Gurung*

1 0

Equality of 2 non-convex constraints?
by Étienne André 22 Mar '17

22 Mar '17

Dear PPL developers, I have a problem with a non-regression test in my tool IMITATOR, that uses PPL for polyhedra operations. The new version of IMITATOR does not output the same result (say k2) as the former (and therefore expected) result (say k1). I use non-convex polyhedra, using the pointset powerset implementation, in Ocaml (the ppl_Pointset_Powerset_NNC_Polyhedron functions). The problem is that: - PPL says that that k2 is not equal to k1 (using function ppl_Pointset_Powerset_NNC_Polyhedron_equals_Pointset_Powerset_NNC_Polyhedron) - PPL says that k2 is not included in k1 (using function ppl_Pointset_Powerset_NNC_Polyhedron_contains_Pointset_Powerset_NNC_Polyhedron) - PPL says that k1 is not included in k2 - PPL says that k2 \ k1 is empty (using ppl_Pointset_Powerset_NNC_Polyhedron_difference_assign) - PPL says that k1 \ k2 is empty So there is clearly a mismatch somewhere. It could be in PPL, or it could be in the functions I use on top of PPL. The same version of PPL (1.1) was used in both versions of the tool, so the problem does not come from a change in PPL. I also did these checks in another (very basic) tool, using PPL 1.2, again from Ocaml, and I obtain the same results. How could I easily test whether the 2 following polyhedra are equal? Or, if not, what is a valuation of the variables that belongs to one but not to the other? I cannot use my own tool (relying on PPL) for the reasons cited above… E.g., could you use a simple interface (e.g., in C++) to perform the check k1 =?= k2? k1 : p_add_sugar > 0 & p_button > p_add_sugar & p_add_sugar + p_coffee > p_button & 15 > p_button OR p_add_sugar >= p_button & 2*p_button > p_add_sugar & p_add_sugar + p_coffee > 2*p_button & 15 > 2*p_button OR p_add_sugar >= 2*p_button & p_add_sugar + p_coffee > 3*p_button & 3*p_button > p_add_sugar & 5 > p_button OR 15 > p_add_sugar + p_coffee & p_coffee > 0 & p_button > 0 & 5 > p_button & p_add_sugar >= 3*p_button k2 : p_add_sugar > 0 & 2*p_button > p_add_sugar & p_add_sugar + p_coffee > 2*p_button & 15 > 2*p_button & p_add_sugar > 0 & p_button > 0 & p_coffee > 0 OR p_add_sugar >= 2*p_button & p_add_sugar + p_coffee > 3*p_button & 3*p_button > p_add_sugar & 5 > p_button & p_add_sugar > 0 & p_button > 0 & p_coffee > 0 OR p_add_sugar > 0 & 2*p_button >= 15 & p_add_sugar + p_coffee > 15 & 15 > p_button & p_button > p_add_sugar & p_add_sugar > 0 & p_button > 0 & p_coffee > 0 OR 2*p_button >= p_add_sugar + p_coffee & p_add_sugar > 0 & p_add_sugar + p_coffee > p_button & p_button > p_add_sugar & 15 >= p_add_sugar + p_coffee & p_add_sugar > 0 & p_button > 0 & p_coffee > 0 OR 15 > p_add_sugar + p_coffee & p_coffee > 0 & p_button > 0 & 5 > p_button & p_add_sugar >= 3*p_button & p_add_sugar > 0 & p_button > 0 & p_coffee > 0 Thank you! Best, -- Étienne André Université Paris 13 http://lipn.univ-paris13.fr/~andre

2 1

PPL Containment check in multiple polytopes
by HazelM 23 Jan '17

23 Jan '17

Hi, I've been trying to merge or perform union on polytopes using poly_hull_assign and upper_bound_assign, but they return poly hull of the resulting polytopes. For my use it would not give accurate results. difference_assign also returns a poly hull. Is there a way that I can find out containment of a polytope in multiple polytopes? Your help would be highly appreciated.

2 1

easy way to extract rays from a polyhedron
by John Perry 15 Jan '17

15 Jan '17

Hello I'd like to extract the rays of a polyhedron. As far as I can tell from the documentation, the only way to do this is to extract the generators, then loop over them, testing which is a ray: Generator_System G = P.generators(); for (Generator g : G) if (g.is_ray()) { /* party time */ } Is there a more direct way to do this, something like G.rays() or even P.rays()? thank you john perry — John Perry + john.perry(a)usm.edu Associate Professor, Department of Mathematics University of Southern Mississippi, Box 5045 Hattiesburg MS 39406 You can and you can’t; you will and you won’t; you’re damned if you do; you’re damned if you don’t. — Lorenzo Dow anticipates C++ compilers by 200 years

2 2

[GIT] ppl/ppl(devel): Copyright years bumped.
by Roberto Bagnara 01 Jan '17

01 Jan '17

1 0