-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 161
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
feat: property based testing of methods of map of all basic types (messages and structs are not supported for now) #1839
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
…xcept int with small serialization
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 did some quick check of the code, but I will later have a deeper look to fully understand everything.
Quite interesting. The code gave me some ideas on how to approach my unit test generation. Thank you!
Sorry to keep you waiting. I think your solution is very clever. However, I talked with @anton-trunov and we arrived to the conclusion that we need to change the approach on this PR so that instead of generating We require this because it would be faster to work with the ASTs and the compiled contracts directly, than parsing For doing the suggested changes, we would need to do the following steps:
In case you find some step confusing or need help, I can explain or jump in to help you with the coding. I will be in charge of reviewing this PR, together with the other PR you opened for the fuzzer #2340. Probably other issues will arise that I did not think of, but feel free to comment in this PR if you get stuck in something. |
Oh, I was forgetting. I suggest to use fixed opcodes for the message structs. For example,
In this way, we can build a cell and pass it to the
Also, if you decide to copy the |
Checklist