feat: add NoFuzzing() testing option #296
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
maybe it shouldn't be ran actually with "PRoverSucceeded" call. The point of this method is to test constraint system solver against the big.Int test engine -> if a witness fails/succeeds with one, it should with the others. What about just calling that separately on our integration tests? |
|
Yup, removing fuzz testing in |
|
(converted to draft until figuring what direction to take) |
Closed
gbotrel
approved these changes
Feb 6, 2023
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The new testing option allows to run assertions on
test.Assertwithout fuzzing. My use case for running tests without fuzzing is in gadget where some errors panic to simplify the API.Additionally, I was not sure if we should omit fuzzing when the tests are run in short mode? Should we?