> but encoding an SMT problem to multiple SAT instances remains a feature there
Sure. I'm not arguing that bitblasting should never be done, it's probably still the best way of solving bitvector problems. My point is that the pedagogical objective of an toy SMT solver is lost if doesn't teach DPLL(T) and only focuses on bitblasting.
Sure. I'm not arguing that bitblasting should never be done, it's probably still the best way of solving bitvector problems. My point is that the pedagogical objective of an toy SMT solver is lost if doesn't teach DPLL(T) and only focuses on bitblasting.