| # DO NOT EDIT; generated by go run testdata/gen.go |
| # |
| #name: resolved self-reference cycles with disjunction |
| #evalPartial |
| -- in.cue -- |
| // The second disjunct in xa1 is not resolvable and can be |
| // eliminated: |
| // xa4 & 9 |
| // (xa2 + 2) & 9 |
| // ((xa3 + 2) + 2) & 9 |
| // (((6 & xa1-2) + 2) + 2) & 9 |
| // ((6 + 2) + 2) & 9 // 6 == xa1-2 |
| // 10 & 9 => _|_ |
| // The remaining values resolve. |
| xa1: (xa2 & 8) | (xa4 & 9) |
| xa2: xa3 + 2 |
| xa3: 6 & xa1-2 |
| xa4: xa2 + 2 |
| |
| // The second disjunct in xb4 can be eliminated as both disjuncts |
| // of xb3 result in an incompatible sum when substituted. |
| xb1: (xb2 & 8) | (xb4 & 9) |
| xb2: xb3 + 2 |
| xb3: (6 & (xb1 - 2)) | (xb4 & 9) |
| xb4: xb2 + 2 |
| |
| // Another variant with more disjunctions. xc1 remains with two |
| // possibilities. Technically, only the first value is valid. |
| // However, to fully determine that, all options of the remaining |
| // disjunction will have to be evaluated algebraically, which is |
| // not done. |
| xc1: xc2 & 8 | xc4 & 9 | xc5 & 9 |
| xc2: xc3 + 2 |
| xc3: 6 & xc1-2 |
| xc4: xc2 + 1 |
| xc5: xc2 + 2 |
| |
| // The above is resolved by setting xd1 explicitly. |
| xd1: xd2 & 8 | xd4 & 9 | xd5 & 9 |
| xd2: xd3 + 2 |
| xd3: 6 & xd1-2 |
| xd4: xd2 + 1 |
| xd5: xd2 + 2 |
| xd1: 8 |
| |
| // The above is resolved by setting xd1 explicitly to the wrong |
| // value, resulting in an error. |
| xe1: xe2 & 8 | xe4 & 9 | xe5 & 9 |
| xe2: xe3 + 2 |
| xe3: 6 & xe1-2 |
| xe4: xe2 + 1 |
| xe5: xe2 + 2 |
| xe1: 9 |
| |
| // Only one solution. |
| xf1: xf2 & 8 | xf4 & 9 |
| xf2: xf3 + 2 |
| xf3: 6 & xf1-2 | xf4 & 9 |
| xf4: xf2 + 2 |
| |
| z1: z2+1 | z3+5 |
| z2: z3 + 2 |
| z3: z1 - 3 |
| z3: 8 |
| -- out/def -- |
| // The second disjunct in xa1 is not resolvable and can be |
| // eliminated: |
| // xa4 & 9 |
| // (xa2 + 2) & 9 |
| // ((xa3 + 2) + 2) & 9 |
| // (((6 & xa1-2) + 2) + 2) & 9 |
| // ((6 + 2) + 2) & 9 // 6 == xa1-2 |
| // 10 & 9 => _|_ |
| // The remaining values resolve. |
| xa1: 8 |
| xa2: 8 |
| xa4: 10 |
| xa3: 6 |
| |
| // The second disjunct in xb4 can be eliminated as both disjuncts |
| // of xb3 result in an incompatible sum when substituted. |
| xb1: 8 |
| xb2: 8 |
| xb4: 10 |
| xb3: 6 |
| |
| // Another variant with more disjunctions. xc1 remains with two |
| // possibilities. Technically, only the first value is valid. |
| // However, to fully determine that, all options of the remaining |
| // disjunction will have to be evaluated algebraically, which is |
| // not done. |
| xc1: xc2 & 8 | xc4 & 9 | xc5 & 9 |
| xc2: xc3 + 2 |
| xc4: xc2 + 1 |
| xc5: xc2 + 2 |
| xc3: 6 & xc1-2 |
| |
| // The above is resolved by setting xd1 explicitly. |
| xd1: 8 |
| xd2: 8 |
| xd4: 9 |
| xd5: 10 |
| xd3: 6 |
| |
| // The above is resolved by setting xd1 explicitly to the wrong |
| // value, resulting in an error. |
| xe1: _|_ // conflicting values 6 and 7 |
| xe2: _|_ // conflicting values 6 and 7 |
| xe4: _|_ // conflicting values 6 and 7 |
| xe5: _|_ // conflicting values 6 and 7 |
| xe3: _|_ // conflicting values 6 and 7 |
| |
| // Only one solution. |
| xf1: 8 |
| xf2: 8 |
| xf4: 10 |
| xf3: 6 |
| z1: z2+1 | z3+5 |
| z2: z3 + 2 |
| z3: z1-3 & 8 |
| -- out/legacy-debug -- |
| <0>{xa1: 8, xa2: 8, xa4: 10, xa3: 6, xb1: 8, xb2: 8, xb4: 10, xb3: 6, xc1: ((<1>.xc2 & 8) | (<1>.xc4 & 9) | (<1>.xc5 & 9)), xc2: (<1>.xc3 + 2), xc4: (<1>.xc2 + 1), xc5: (<1>.xc2 + 2), xc3: (6 & (<1>.xc1 - 2)), xd1: 8, xd2: 8, xd4: 9, xd5: 10, xd3: 6, xe1: _|_((6 & 7):conflicting values 6 and 7), xe2: _|_((6 & 7):conflicting values 6 and 7), xe4: _|_((6 & 7):conflicting values 6 and 7), xe5: _|_((6 & 7):conflicting values 6 and 7), xe3: _|_((6 & 7):conflicting values 6 and 7), xf1: 8, xf2: 8, xf4: 10, xf3: 6, z1: ((<1>.z2 + 1) | (<1>.z3 + 5)), z2: (<1>.z3 + 2), z3: ((<1>.z1 - 3) & 8)} |