-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
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
Refactor mutation_replace_binary_operator to use macros #205
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
@afd There are two approaches I could take with this PR. I could either replace the mutation of each operator with their own macro, i.e
or we instead extract the template and have one macro The former approach would allow different mutation templates to be applied to different operators if desired, but the later would simplify the output code substantially. What is your opinion? |
The first approach is implemented at the moment, but could be changed quite easily. |
I'm not sure. I think the approach with more macros, allowing more flexibility per macro, is probably better. I don't anticipate the current approach to mutation with Dredd changing much, so I guess we need to think through what your use case for coverage-guided fuzzing will need. For your use case I can see us needing quite a bit of flexibility, as each operator will need different UB checking. So it's likely the first approach you mention is better. Note: this macros approach is just one thing we should consider. It could be that we go some way down that road and decide it's not what we want after all, but it's hard to know until we try, so thanks for initially prototyping this. |
No description provided.