Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!news.iecc.com!.POSTED.news.iecc.com!nerds-end From: Hans-Peter Diettrich Newsgroups: comp.compilers Subject: Re: random debugging, What should I prepare for a PL PhD program Date: Sun, 23 Oct 2022 01:27:18 +0200 Organization: Compilers Central Sender: news@iecc.com Approved: comp.compilers@iecc.com Message-ID: <22-10-049@comp.compilers> References: <22-10-029@comp.compilers> <22-10-031@comp.compilers> <22-10-035@comp.compilers> <22-10-036@comp.compilers> <22-10-039@comp.compilers> <22-10-040@comp.compilers> <22-10-042@comp.compilers> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: gal.iecc.com; posting-host="news.iecc.com:2001:470:1f07:1126:0:676f:7373:6970"; logging-data="87767"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@iecc.com" Keywords: debug Posted-Date: 22 Oct 2022 22:51:42 EDT X-submission-address: compilers@iecc.com X-moderator-address: compilers-request@iecc.com X-FAQ-and-archives: http://compilers.iecc.com In-Reply-To: <22-10-042@comp.compilers> Xref: csiph.com comp.compilers:3219 On 10/22/22 10:49 AM, Thomas Koenig wrote: > An automated code generator which generates valid programs according > to the syntax and semantics rules of a langauge and then systematically > violates the rules (especially those prescribed outside the formal > grammar) one by one might be possible. Alternatively, it might > also be feasible to parse an existing code base and systematically > insert violations there. Isn't it good practice to maintain a test suite at least for compilers, that contains both selected valid and invalid code snippets? For error reports on obviously weird input I'd prepare an equally weird answer ;-) DoDi