Go Fuzz Testing • Hacker News Board

Re: Go Fuzz Testing

#21

Post by Andoryuuta » Wed, Mar 30, 2022, 4:38 AM UTC

throwawaylala1 wrote: post #20

That first example is deceptive. In this line: for i := 0; i The " When I did a quick scan of that code it looked good to me. Then he claimed it should panic and I felt crazy. So I copy/pasted the code into an editor to see wtf was going on and sure enough it was "<=".

This is my main issue with fonts made for programming that use special ligature marks. They _look_ cool, but they are very hard to tell apart from other characters.

It's like someone decided that the I, l, 1 confusion wasn't enough and decided to add more. :P

Re: Go Fuzz Testing

#22

Post by akshayshah » Wed, Mar 30, 2022, 5:13 AM UTC

jiehong wrote: post #15

It’s a bit surprising to have fuzzing as part of the standard tool chain, but not property based testing. I guess we still need to rely on something like gopter.

testing/quick is in the standard lib, though it's a very far cry from Hypothesis or QuickCheck.

Re: Go Fuzz Testing

#23

Post by masklinn » Wed, Mar 30, 2022, 6:52 AM UTC

jiehong wrote: post #15

It’s a bit surprising to have fuzzing as part of the standard tool chain, but not property based testing. I guess we still need to rely on something like gopter.

> It’s a bit surprising to have fuzzing as part of the standard tool chain, but not property based testing.

Property testing doesn’t really benefit from (let alone need) toolchain integration, so while having better support for proptesting would be nice and give them more visibility, it’s far from critical.