Skip to content

Commit c2e88b3

Browse files
authored
Merge pull request #734 from RalfJung/readme
expand explanation of how we treat validity invariants
2 parents f761450 + df36c2b commit c2e88b3

File tree

1 file changed

+5
-3
lines changed

1 file changed

+5
-3
lines changed

README.md

Lines changed: 5 additions & 3 deletions
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -23,9 +23,11 @@ Be aware that Miri will not catch all possible errors in your program, and
2323
cannot run all programs:
2424

2525
* There are still plenty of open questions around the basic invariants for some
26-
types and when these invariants even have to hold, so if you program runs fine
27-
in Miri right now that is by no means a guarantee that it is UB-free when
28-
these questions get answered.
26+
types and when these invariants even have to hold. Miri tries to avoid false
27+
positives here, so if you program runs fine in Miri right now that is by no
28+
means a guarantee that it is UB-free when these questions get answered. In
29+
particular, Miri does currently not check that integers are initialized or
30+
that references point to valid data.
2931
* If the program relies on unspecified details of how data is laid out, it will
3032
still run fine in Miri -- but might break (including causing UB) on different
3133
compiler versions or different platforms.

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)