pynguin VS icontract-hypothesis

https://swagger.io/specification/ https://github.com/se2p/pynguin

I would use black to reformat this, then, if you can't refactor/rewrite (which is a lot of work!) I would try automated test generation via something like pynguin or fuzzing. I mean … this is not going to be a reliable solution anyways if the codebase is like that. So I would go in a direction that I find interesting to learn about and that could be helpful for the project. That would be generating tests and doing fuzzing. In the end you should run some linters anyways so that you can justify your results and show that the task is not in the scope of an internship and needs extensive refactoring.

The main difference that Klara bring to the table, compared to similar tool like pynguin and Crosshair is that the analysis is entirely static, meaning that no user code will be executed, and you can easily extend the test generation strategy via plugin loading (e.g. the options arg to the Component object returned from function above is not needed for test coverage).

Automated White-box test generation software: * https://github.com/EMResearch/EvoMaster -- for integration tests. * https://github.com/se2p/pynguin, https://pynguin.readthedocs.io/en/latest/user/quickstart.html -- unit test generation for python

Pynguin – Generate Python unit tests automatically\ (60 comments)

https://github.com/mristin/icontract-hypothesis

Nagini and deal-solver attempt to Formally Verify Python code with or without unit tests: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39139198

Additional research:

"Fuzz target generation using LLMs" (2023)

https://icontract.readthedocs.io/en/latest/usage.html#invari...

For unit testing, there's icontract-hypothesis; with the Preconditions and Postconditions delineated by e.g. decorators, it's possible to generate many of the fuzz tests from the additional Design by Contract structure of the source.

From https://github.com/mristin/icontract-hypothesis :

> icontract-hypothesis combines design-by-contract with automatic testing.

> It is an integration between icontract library for design-by-contract and Hypothesis library for property-based testing.

> The result is a powerful combination that allows you to automatically test your code. Instead of writing manually the Hypothesis search strategies for a function, icontract-hypothesis infers them based on the function’s [sic] precondition

Just in case you are looking for an alternative approach: if you write contracts in your code, you might also consider crosshair [1] or icontract-hypothesis [2]. If your function/method does not need any pre-conditions then the the type annotations can be directly used.

(I'm one of the authors of icontract-hypothesis.)

[1] https://github.com/pschanely/CrossHair

[2] https://github.com/mristin/icontract-hypothesis