Changed DIMAC cnf file parsing #16
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Changes the way the CNF file is parsed.
The previous implementation used a buffer of fixed size causing too long clauses to silently be cut off (#15). This implementation is based on sharpSAT's, going over literals using
>>andifstream.ignore.I tested it against the long clause file of #15 and it gave the correct model count, nbVars and nbClauses. Also tested exp-testing/bmc-ibm-2.cnf, exp-testing/logistics.a.cnf and a 2bitmax_6.cnf file I had from some benchmarks, and confirmed the model counts, nbVars and nbClauses are still correct. I purposely changed
p cnf 252 766top cnf 252and it crashed and warned correctly.