News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Not the autoworkers of our generation by tensor on Monday September 02, 2013 @09:06PM (#6318137)
What makes you think that you can give a probability that a program has an infinite loop in it?

As for your request:

https://ece.uwaterloo.ca/~lintan/publications/r2fix-icst13.p...

But bugs aside, part of the allure of having a program generate a program is that it is much less likely to produce bugs in the first place. That said, we still have a ways to go before we achieve human-like synthetic developers.

Re:Not the autoworkers of our generation by zeteo on Monday September 02, 2013 @09:23PM (#6318188)
>What makes you think that you can give a probability that a program has an infinite loop in it?

I can't. That's why I basically rummage through the code base, using all kinds of heuristics, most of which I make up on the spot. Sometimes it takes me two minutes to find that off-by-one, and other times two days.

Interesting paper. I don't think it will help that much though:

>Ideally, we want to automatically generate patches for all bug reports. Realistically, it is impossible. [...] Even among bugs that can be fixed, some are too complex to be fixed automatically [...] Therefore, a realistic goal is to automatically generate patches for relatively simple bugs [where] the bug reports contain useful information, e.g., the buggy file and the symptom