News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on AFLFast vs. Erlang.

Re:AFLFast vs. Erlang by jwatte on Tuesday August 23, 2016 @11:57PM (#12349571)
You can also get QuickCheck for Erlang, although that stays at the Erlang fuzzing level, not AFL style branch fuzzing. Still, finds bugs!
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AFLFast vs. Erlang by jlouis on Wednesday August 24, 2016 @04:17AM (#12350529)
Fuzzing is different from QuickChecking:

QuickCheck uses hand-crafted known properties and generators. Fuzzing don't. QuickCheck can be used to find negative tests, but this is the sole target of a fuzzer. There are some similarities in the approach, but it is not the same kind of tool.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:AFLFast vs. Erlang by masklinn on Wednesday August 24, 2016 @03:59AM (#12350462)
QuickCheck is for testing Erlang code, not the Erlang VM itself.
[ Parent | on HN ]