Concolic testing for functional languages

Giantsios, Aggelos; Papaspyrou, Nikolaos; Sagonas, Konstantinos

doi:10.1016/j.scico.2017.04.008

Cited by 16 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In these figures, the big dark grey areas are used to group several processes with a common objective. Light grey boxes outside these areas represent inputs and light grey boxes inside these areas represent processes, white boxes represent intermediate lists:reverse(L); (8) happy list(X, N, L) -> (9) Happy = is happy(X), (10) if Happy -> (11) happy list(X + 1, N, [X|L]); (12) true -> (13) happy list(X + 1, N, L) end. (14) (15) is happy(1) -> true; (16) is happy(4) -> false; (17) is happy(N) when N > 0 -> (18) N As Digits = (19) [Y -48 || (20) Y <integer to list(N)], (21) is happy ( (22) lists:foldl ( (23) fun(X, Sum) -> (24) (X * X) + Sum (25) end, (26) 0, (27) N As Digits)); (28) is happy( ) -> false.…”

Section: Overview Of Our Approach To Automated Regression Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…true -> false; (8) false -> (9) is happy(sum(map(fun(Z) -> Z * Z end, (10) [Y -48 || Y <integer to list(X)])), (11) [X|XS]) (12) end (13) end. (14) happy(X, Top, XS) -> (15) if (16) length(XS) == Top -> sort(XS); (17) true -> (18) case is happy(X,[]) of (19) true -> happy(X + 1, Top, [X|XS]); (20) false -> happy(X + 1,Top, XS) (21) end (22) end.…”

Section: Overview Of Our Approach To Automated Regression Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We have implemented our approach in a tool named SecEr (Software Evolution Control for Erlang), which is publicly available at https://github.com/mistupv/secer. Instead of reinventing the wheel, some of the analyses performed by our tool are done by other existing tools such as CutEr [9], a concolic testing tool, to generate an initial set of test cases that maximize the branching coverage; TypEr [10], a type inference system for Erlang, to obtain types for the input functions; and PropEr [11], a property-based testing tool, to obtain values of a given type. All the analyses performed by SecEr are transparent to the user.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…http://rosettacode.org/wiki/Happy numbers#Erlang The initial and final versions of this code as they appear in Rosetta Code are shown in Listings 1 and 2, respectively. In order to check whether the behaviour is the same in both versions, we could select as POI the call in line (9) of Listing 1 and the call in line (18) of Listing 2. We also need to define a timeout because the test case generation phase could be infinite due to the test mutation process (the number of possible execution paths could be infinite and an infinite number of test cases could be generated).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Behaviour Preservation across Code Versions in Erlang

Insa

Pérez

Silva

et al. 2018

Scientific Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In any alive and nontrivial program, the source code naturally evolves along the lifecycle for many reasons such as the implementation of new functionality, the optimization of a bottleneck, or the refactoring of an obscure function. Frequently, these code changes affect various different functions and modules, so it can be difficult to know whether the correct behaviour of the previous version has been preserved in the new version. In this paper, we face this problem in the context of the Erlang language, where most developers rely on a previously defined test suite to check the behaviour preservation. We propose an alternative approach to automatically obtain a test suite that specifically focusses on comparing the old and new versions of the code. Our test case generation is directed by a sophisticated combination of several already existing tools such as TypEr, CutEr, and PropEr; and it introduces novel ideas such as allowing the programmer to choose one or more expressions of interest that must preserve the behaviour, or the recording of the sequences of values to which those expressions are evaluated. All the presented work has been implemented in an open-source tool that is publicly available on GitHub.

show abstract

Section: Overview Of Our Approach To Automated Regression Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Overview Of Our Approach To Automated Regression Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Behaviour Preservation across Code Versions in Erlang

Insa

Pérez

Silva

et al. 2018

Scientific Programming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Symbolic execution [27] is a meta-programming technique that is at the core of techniques for boosting developer productivity, such as automated testing [3,9,17,19,38] and program synthesis [14,20,35]. A symbolic executor allows exploration of possible execution paths by running a program with symbolic variables in place of concrete values.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

From definitional interpreter to symbolic executor

Mensing

Antwerpen

Poulsen

et al. 2019

Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGPLAN International Workshop on Meta-Programming Techniques and Reflection

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Symbolic execution is a technique for automatic software validation and verification. New symbolic executors regularly appear for both existing and new languages and such symbolic executors are generally manually (re)implemented each time we want to support a new language. We propose to automatically generate symbolic executors from language definitions, and present a technique for mechanically (but as yet, manually) deriving a symbolic executor from a definitional interpreter. The idea is that language designers define their language as a monadic definitional interpreter, where the monad of the interpreter defines the meaning of branch points. Developing a symbolic executor for a language is a matter of changing the monadic interpretation of branch points. In this paper, we illustrate the technique on a language with recursive functions and pattern matching, and use the derived symbolic executor to automatically generate test cases for definitional interpreters implemented in our defined language. CCS Concepts • Theory of computation → Program schemes; • Software and its engineering → Formal methods; Automatic programming.

show abstract

Generating Next Step Hints for Task Oriented Programs Using Symbolic Execution

Naus

Steenvoorden

2020

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Software that models business workflows is omnipresent in today's society. These systems coordinate collaboration in hospitals, companies, and military institutions. Unfortunately, workflow systems may obfuscate the influence of current user actions on the desired end result. In order to make the right decision, users need to oversee the full process and all information available, both of which are usually buried in the system. We have developed a way to automatically generate next step hints for task oriented programs. Task oriented programming provides programmers with an abstraction over workflow software, while still being expressive enough to describe real world collaboration. By leveraging symbolic execution, we can calculate these hints without modification of the original program. To our knowledge, this is the first time that symbolic execution is used to automatically generate next step hints for end users. We prove the generated hints to be sound and complete, and also demonstrate that the symbolic execution semantics we employ is correct for sequential input. In addition, we have developed a Haskell implementation of our automatic next step hint generation system. By providing next step hints, the chance of human error is reduced, while still allowing end users to intervene if required. The overall performance is raised, since the quality of decisions will improve.

show abstract

Concolic testing for functional languages

Cited by 16 publications

References 7 publications

Behaviour Preservation across Code Versions in Erlang

Behaviour Preservation across Code Versions in Erlang

From definitional interpreter to symbolic executor

Generating Next Step Hints for Task Oriented Programs Using Symbolic Execution

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About