Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@sebrose
Last active June 9, 2017 11:34
Show Gist options
  • Star 0 You must be signed in to star a gist
  • Fork 0 You must be signed in to fork a gist
  • Save sebrose/fd39536aef29dfe45442b9d0dc52bac6 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
Save sebrose/fd39536aef29dfe45442b9d0dc52bac6 to your computer and use it in GitHub Desktop.
2017-06-07 Notes from Gitter meetings

Notes 2017-06-07

We ran two meetings in appear.in - which worked fine for some of us, but not all. Will try Hangouts next time.

12:00 BST

Present: Seb, Henry, James, Liam, Pawel, Gaspar, Alex

Henry:

  • gave us an overview of how pitest got developed and some of the key performance challenges
    • An extended write up can be found here
  • There was a discussion about whether it would be best to mutate the IL or the AST.
    • experiments/spikes seem to be required.

Pawel:

  • was going to write his own mutation testing tool

James got cut off a couple of times, but what I heard him say was:

  • the number of test frameworks we support would add to complexity
  • there's nothing physical to port from pitest, but the learning & high level architecture could be used
  • mutating the AST might exclude (or make more complex) supporting multiple CLR languages
    • Roslyn supports direct manipulation of AST
  • Ninja Turtle (now defunkt) took the IL approach

Liam:

  • going with AST makes sense
  • there may be nothing to gain from looking at pitest directly
  • is there someone with deep CLR knowledge that could talk directly with Henry?

Alex:

  • has produced a mature mutation testing tool for C/C++ and LLVM IL (?)

Gaspar:

  • target .NET Core rather than classic .NET just incase there are significant portability issues
  • C# is major CLR language, so don't let coverage of other languages unduly affect the IL/AST decision

18:00 BST

Present: Seb, Simon, Peter, Stanislaw

Simon & Peter:

  • Stryker.NET is in very early experimental stages
    • currently can manipulate AST, but doesn't compile or run tests
    • suggest targeting onlt MSTest initially
  • have a domain
  • would encourage people to help with the project
    • will create issues/project items in Github to give new contributors a way in
    • have some contacts at Microsoft who may be able/prepared to give us pertinent information
    • will sketch out a high level architecture
  • it would be good if the various mutation testing tools could integrate identically with common external frameworks (e.g. Jenkins SonarQube)

Stanislaw:

  • working on C/C++ tool, so attending in 'read only' mode
    • will share experiences

My observations

  • seems there are a number of people who are interested in contributing
  • Stryker.NET has already started (somewhat), so makes sense to contribute to that project
  • there's a lot to be learnt from pitest
  • the IL/AST question is important
    • can the architecture make that decision [relatively] cheap to change, or do we need to get it right the first time
    • we don't really have a handle on the runtime implications of the choices
    • IL and AST spikes would seem to be an obvious first step, incorporating compilation
  • Stryker is (effectively) a team of 2 work colleagues
    • to absorb more contributors may be challenging
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment