-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20
feat(wcp): make ct max deterministic #171
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Signed-off-by: F Bojarski <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
-
(Latex) The latex wouldn't compile for me without modification. There is a missing colour called
draculagreen
. I put in simple definition so I could view the PDF. -
(Determinism). I get the idea, but it doesn't seem right to impose
BYTE_X != 0
whenCT_i==1
. I would think you needVLI==1 && CT==0
as the requirement. Otherwise, cannot I not constructARG_1
/ARG_2
with something like0xFF00FF
which would be rejected by your requirement?
\item $\ct_{N} = \maxCt_{N}$. | ||
\end{enumerate} | ||
\saNote{} We don't explicitly impose anything on the value of $\maxCt_i$ when $\vli_i \equiv 1$. | ||
But the above forces us to have at all times $0 \leq \ct_{i} \leq \maxCt_{i} < \llarge$, at the very least whenever $\wcpStamp_{i} \neq 0$ if the implementation omits the constraints marked with $(\trash)$. | ||
\saNote{} When $\vli_i \equiv 1$, the value of $\maxCt_i$ is imposed: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There's a problem here in the presentation. Its not formatted as a bullet point list which I'm assuming is what you intended. Its actually very confusing and only by looking at the latex source could I understand what you meant.
Signed-off-by: F Bojarski <[email protected]>
Having the check at CT == 0 is not possible, as it would make the request
Just to have an inequalities as a guard instead of equality, to reduce a little bit the constraint. |
Wouldn't that be a One Line Instruction then? In which case you can separate that out. Anyway, it doesn't matter. Using |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
you still can't check at CT == 0, even if VLI ==1, as it would make |
No description provided.