afl.rs VS quickcheck

I had the same experience with pomsky, setting up cargo fuzz is simple and well worth it! I also use afl.rs, which was able to find a stack exhaustion bug that cargo fuzz didn't find.

afl.rs provides a convenient tool to fuzz with afl++, will it be updated to leverage libafl or are the goals incompatible / is the target of libafl different?

Maybe https://github.com/BurntSushi/quickcheck too?

Yeah as other have mentioned, I was using Rust before 1.0.

This is my first public commit: https://github.com/BurntSushi/quickcheck/commit/c9eb2884d6a6...

I didn't write any substantive Rust before that point. So I'm at over 9 years.

The book, Zero To Production In Rust, uses quickcheck:

Hi all! I'm looking for some feedback on my latest crate, reltester. It's a small utility crate that, when paired with property-based testing with e.g. quickcheck makes it very easy to check that your handwritten comparison trait implementations satisfy the necessary constraints (transitivity, reflexivity, and all that stuff). I wrote it our of frustration after finding many subtle bugs in our PartialEq and PartialOrd implementations at $JOB, and hopefully someone else will find it useful.

For what it's worth this would also be a good candidate for property based testing, like with: https://github.com/BurntSushi/quickcheck

I'm aware of Hypothesis and its approach, but the connection between Hypothesis and arbitrary is indeed non-obvious. Even looking over the API docs again, the most I could pick up was this on the docs of Unstructured:

Quickcheck https://github.com/BurntSushi/quickcheck

I'm running into a strange issue while using [quickcheck](https://github.com/BurntSushi/quickcheck) to implement tests and I'm hoping someone here might have an idea. Long story short, I have tests which fail in weird ways when using quickcheck that I can't reproduce otherwise, so I'm not even sure if it's a legitimate issue or not.