You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 9, 2019. It is now read-only.
It seems that the implementation of fuzzers and especially shrinkers is constantly in flux. But, we also appear to be designing blind.
I am asking for real-world examples of when 100-run fuzz tests were unsatisfactory. That is, SSCCEs of code and test where the tests either do not detect a bug or shrink to an unhelpfully large counterexample. Also indicate the (human-derived) smallest failing value that the fuzzer did not find.
Again, real-world examples: something that came up in production Elm code or caused you a significant amount of troublesome debugging.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It seems that the implementation of fuzzers and especially shrinkers is constantly in flux. But, we also appear to be designing blind.
I am asking for real-world examples of when 100-run fuzz tests were unsatisfactory. That is, SSCCEs of code and test where the tests either do not detect a bug or shrink to an unhelpfully large counterexample. Also indicate the (human-derived) smallest failing value that the fuzzer did not find.
Again, real-world examples: something that came up in production Elm code or caused you a significant amount of troublesome debugging.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: