gotests VS go-fuzz

A huge time-saver for me when generating table-driven test boilerplate in Go has been using gotests[0] to generate the template.

If you use VSCode with the Go extension it's already available there as a command "Go: Generate Unit Tests for Function/Package".

[0] https://github.com/cweill/gotests

I believe vscode does it using gotests (https://github.com/cweill/gotests), so people can probably use it outside of vscode too.

What can do this plugin? - Modify struct tags. - Run go get, go mod & go generate commands inside of nvim. - Implement interface by impl. - Generate tests by gotests. - Install required tools for plugin working(by go install).

I was just thinking about some smart solutions. For example generating test plan and fake data by inspecting current changes on the code and db schema. Just like this https://github.com/cweill/gotests but for performance test plans.

Did you encounter gotests when you were doing your research? It's a table test generation tool that generates test code using t.Run(). I do wish it could generate tests using testify, because I frequently end up rewriting the code in the inner loop, but I still use it because it's better than I am about ensuring there's a test for all functions I write.

I use https://github.com/cweill/gotests to generate the test scaffolding.

You can save yourself a minute and generate the test case boilerplate for your with https://github.com/cweill/gotests :)

I used this method successfully for my qjson package . It accepts as input a human readable json. It detected a condition I forgot to check in a few minutes. I used the go fuzzer go-fuzz from Dmitry Vyukov. Check the impressive list of trophies at the end of the README. These are bugs found by the fuzzer.

It does instrumented fuzzing. The older https://github.com/dvyukov/go-fuzz would rewrite your sources to inject the instrumentation and pass the rewritten sources to the compiler, but it didn't really work with Go modules. This is something that probably makes sense to integrate with the compiler toolchain, same as `go test`'s coverage testing.

And another Go-Fuzz

Anyone seen good articles on converting go-fuzz tests to native fuzzing? Specifics on the new corpus format and a converter from go-fuzz would be really useful.

It’s great to hear that the fuzzer is built on go-fuzz so hopefully the conversion process won’t be too bad: https://github.com/dvyukov/go-fuzz/issues/329

> it shows the limitations of the language that you can't just build this inside the language.

Not sure why you'd make that assumption. https://github.com/dvyukov/go-fuzz

Rather than explore the specific issues my tests found, I started playing with running https://github.com/dvyukov/go-fuzz against go-json which seems to have fairly quickly found some issues. I've opened https://github.com/goccy/go-json/issues/174 to start the conversation about how you want to proceed here.

You can check the go-fuzz's trophies here.

Maybe you can add support for using a fuzzer like https://github.com/dvyukov/go-fuzz or https://github.com/google/gofuzz

I recently stumbled upon go-fuzz (that is also linked in the proposal). I'm amazed how fuzzing has made the go toolchain stronger and integrated this technique into some of our CI/CD pipelines for continuous testing. Having native fuzzy testing support (not just in go) would be great.

Go tests and benchmarks are so easy to write and run: just add TestFoo and BenchmarkFoo functions to a bar_test.go file, and "go test" does the rest. It's currently doable, but it requires a 3rd party library (go-fuzz) and a bit of fluffing around. This will make fuzz testing an equally first-class citizen with standard Go tooling (just add FuzzFoo), and as such we'll probably see a lot more people testing with fuzzing.

I used go-fuzz in GoAWK and it found several bugs (see https://benhoyt.com/writings/goawk/#fuzz-testing), and almost everyone who's done fuzz testing has similar reports. Certainly go-fuzz has found many, many bugs in Go itself: https://github.com/dvyukov/go-fuzz#trophies

For what it's worth, I wrote an article for LWN about the upcoming support for built-in fuzzing in Go: https://lwn.net/Articles/829242/ (of course, if you want full details, read the full proposal).