Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
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
Added fuzzer tests #500
Added fuzzer tests #500
Changes from 1 commit
06e5dc1
7da5f54
f242994
8f0aa7c
d7fb04e
fa0c478
f55531d
8490a2b
8c0f5a3
b034f20
4db59bf
35cd990
93aab6e
5a66cf2
61c1937
0611b2c
c8c2f69
cd28172
17a4a70
db1e978
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I wonder if this setup phase really needs to be repeated when fuzzing or whether fuzzing should occur on the message only, WDYT?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was thinking that fuzzing on the parameter n would have been more interesting than using just; I'd say that the cost of repeating these operations is not that expensive and leads some value in increased exploration. But if you feel it's relevant to fuzz only on n I can change it
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
In general, fuzzing should be repeatable. Given the same "fuzzing corpus of input messages" I should get the same outputs/results in all runs.
Could we change this code so that there is no randomness outside of the fuzzer msg?
Maybe seed the
RandomStream
usingmsg
.