Skip to content

Insert missing negation #95

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Insert missing negation #95

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 1 addition & 1 deletion docs/core/concurrency.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -314,7 +314,7 @@ These are all the interesting invariants I see right now. But I also see some pr

For those reasons alone, invariants are insufficient to fully model our system properties. But there's a deeper problem here. ``AllDone`` only says that if the processes finish, we have the correct result. If we change the spec in a way that lets a thread noop-loop forever, then the invariant trivially passes. What we really want to say is that no matter what, *eventually* we get the correct result.

This is an entirely different class of requirement! Instead of saying that our system does the wrong thing, we want to show it always does the right thing. In the :doc:`next chapter <temporal-logic>`, we'll learn how to write and check these kinds of properties.
This is an entirely different class of requirement! Instead of only saying that our system does not do the wrong thing, we want to show it always does the right thing. In the :doc:`next chapter <temporal-logic>`, we'll learn how to write and check these kinds of properties.


Summary
Expand Down