* src/tgba/succiterconcrete.cc, src/tgba/tgbaexplicit.cc,

src/tgba/tgbatba.cc, src/tgbaalgos/lbtt.cc: Use `-' instead of `& !'
between two BDDs.  That's one less call to BuDDy.
This commit is contained in:
Alexandre Duret-Lutz 2003-08-10 13:09:50 +00:00
parent 63c62e1767
commit 317fed597b
6 changed files with 15 additions and 11 deletions

View file

@ -28,7 +28,7 @@ namespace spot
fv_map::iterator sii = var_map.find(f);
if (sii != var_map.end())
{
num = sii->second;
num = sii->second;
}
else
{

View file

@ -66,11 +66,11 @@ namespace spot
do
{
// FIXME: Iterating on the successors this way (calling
// bdd_satone{,set} and NANDing out the result from a
// bdd_satone{,set} and NANDing out (-=) the result from a
// set) requires several descent of the BDD. Maybe it would be
// faster to compute all satisfying formula in one operation.
succ_set_left_ &= !current_;
succ_set_left_ -= current_;
if (succ_set_left_ == bddfalse) // No more successors?
return;
@ -113,7 +113,7 @@ namespace spot
// So, first, filter out all transitions like p, which
// are also in other accepting sets.
bdd fout = bdd_relprod(as, !current_acc_, data_.acc_set);
bdd as_fout = as & !fout;
bdd as_fout = as - fout;
// Then, pick the remaining term that are exactly in all
// required accepting sets.
bdd all = bddtrue;
@ -121,7 +121,7 @@ namespace spot
do
{
bdd one_acc = bdd_satone(acc);
acc &= !one_acc;
acc -= one_acc;
all &= bdd_relprod(as_fout, one_acc, data_.acc_set);
}
while (acc != bddfalse);

View file

@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ namespace spot
void
tgba_explicit::add_neg_condition(transition* t, ltl::formula* f)
{
t->condition &= ! get_condition(f);
t->condition -= get_condition(f);
}
void

View file

@ -156,14 +156,14 @@ namespace spot
// Now build the "cycle" of accepting conditions.
bdd last = bdd_satone(all);
all &= !last;
all -= last;
acc_cycle_[bddtrue] = last;
while (all != bddfalse)
{
bdd next = bdd_satone(all);
all &= !next;
all -= next;
acc_cycle_[last] = next;
last = next;
}