tybug

4 ms·

1.
Property-Based Testing(tybug.dev)
2 points by tybug 3mo ago|0 comments
2.
Swarm Testing(tybug.dev)
2 points by tybug 4mo ago|0 comments
3.
by tybug 5mo ago
We plan to rewrite hypothesis in rust and expose an FFI through that! This is a medium term plan (months, not weeks or years), but we're acutely aware that relying on a python component is not a long-term solution.
4.
by tybug 5mo ago
Yes! I just wrote up documentation for the protocol earlier this week: https://hegel.dev/reference/protocol . In reality, we hope to provide more guidance than this to people who want to write their own language fronten
5.
by tybug 5mo ago
I didn't expect to see Hegel when opening up HN today! Feel free to ask any questions about it. We released hegel-go earlier this week, and plan to release hegel-cpp sometime next week, so look forward to that :)
6.
by tybug 6mo ago
To put it on the record: my position is current models can't get us there, and neither can the next iteration of models, but in two model iterations this will be worth doing. There's a lot of fiddly details in Hypothesis that ar
7.
by tybug 6mo ago
`from_type` just supports a bunch more things than rust ever can due to the flexibility of python's type system. `from_type(object)` is amazing, for example, and not something we can write in rust.
8.
by tybug 6mo ago
Yep, `#[derive(DefaultGenerator)]` and `generators::default<T>()` are the right tools here. This is one of the areas we've dogfooded the least, so we'd definitely be happy to get feedback on any sharp corners here! I think `
9.
by tybug 6mo ago
I actually think there's another angle here where PBT helps, which wasn't explored in the blog post. That angle is legibility . How do you know your AI-written slop software is doing the right thing? One would normally read all t
10.
by tybug 6mo ago
As possibly the one community on earth where it's actually better to post the code than the blog post: TL;DR this is a universal property-based testing protocol ( https://github.com/hegeldev/hegel-core ) and family
11.
Property-based testing is about to rule the (software) world(tybug.dev)
2 points by tybug 7mo ago|0 comments
12.
by tybug 10mo ago
Appreciate the thoughts <3. I do think there might be stronger examples we could choose. Possibly json encode/decode..
13.
by tybug 11mo ago
(Hypothesis maintainer here) If you have recommendations for a better example on the front page, I'd love to hear them! (I mean this entirely genuinely and non-sarcastically; I agree sorting can give misleading ideas, but it is also co
14.
by tybug 11mo ago
(Hypothesis maintainer here) Yup, a standard test suite just doesn't run for long enough for coverage guidance to be worthwhile by default. That said, coverage-guided fuzzing can be a really valuable and effective form of testing (see
15.
by tybug 1y ago
Nice! "testing your test code" is particularly important when dealing with PBT distributions, especially when your generator gets more complicated. Tyche [0] is another cool tool for addressing the same problem, visualizing the PB
16.
by tybug 1y ago
The Hypothesis explain phase [1][2] does this! fails_on_empty_third_arg( a = "", # or any other generated value b = "", # or any other generated value c = "", d = "",
17.
by tybug 2y ago
That kind of behavior can happen at the threshold of Hypothesis' internal limit on entropy - though if you're not hitting HealthCheck.data_too_large then this seems unlikely. Let me know if you have a reproducer, I'd be curio
18.
by tybug 2y ago
(not OP but I would be surprised if the answer wasn't) yes, because you're changing the order in which the random draws are interpreted. But this isn't a problem in practice because you generally aren't changing the gene
19.
by tybug 3y ago
You're right, I misstated this - but I don't think this is fatal. The other sibling commenters pointed out the real issue with my thinking. The argument goes the same even though I misspoke here. If the machine {halts, runs foreve
20.
by tybug 3y ago
I suppose I did! I was having a hard time reconciling this with the intuition that BB(n) is in principle "computable" (colloquially speaking) for any n - my thinking went that if I want to compute BB(n), I can enumerate turing mac
21.
by tybug 3y ago
I'm hoping someone can enlighten me here. My understanding is that there is a turing machine of 748 states [0], which halts iff ZFC is inconsistent (Thm 1). But this machine is a "physical" object, in the sense that we can ma
22.
by tybug 3y ago
No disagreement here. But I hold that this is an especially confusing way of describing independent statements, especially in this paper, which certainly was written by a logician. I take particular issue with the phrasing because it conf
23.
by tybug 3y ago
A common misconception in the first paragraph: > However, Godel shattered these aspirations in 1931 by proving the existence of true but unprovable mathematical formulas. Godel sentences are unprovable, but they are not "true&quot
24.
by tybug 4y ago
Formal systems need not be consistent; if a formal system assumes both P and ~P as axioms, you can derive S and ~S (for any S) by explosion.
25.
by tybug 4y ago
I would argue "reasoning about programs" formally means "can prove P Q R ..." (with appropriate choices for P Q R) and doesn't implicitly carry an assumption of consistency. But, fair enough.
26.
by tybug 4y ago
> But the same reasoning can be applied to any formal system F, with fairly minimal assumptions: Strictly speaking, F has to be satisfiable/consistent as well. {P, ~P} is a trivially recursively enumerable, complete theory which con
27.
by tybug 5y ago
I realize this quote isn't meant to be taken literally, and it's a nice one-liner encapsulation of metaclasses, but it always bothered me. The people who "actually need metaclasses" were, at some point, learning about me
28.
by tybug 5y ago
The most salient example I can think of is tracking all subclasses of a class. This is how django tracks `Model` subclasses to create a table for each model, for instance. I wrote a blog post on this topic: https://tybug.github.i