经验报告:将随机测试应用于基本类型环境

Vincent St-Amour, N. Toronto
{"title":"经验报告:将随机测试应用于基本类型环境","authors":"Vincent St-Amour, N. Toronto","doi":"10.1145/2500365.2500616","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As programmers, programming in typed languages increases our confidence in the correctness of our programs. As type system designers, soundness proofs increase our confidence in the correctness of our type systems. There is more to typed languages than their typing rules, however. To be usable, a typed language needs to provide a well-furnished standard library and to specify types for its exports. As software artifacts, these base type environments can rival typecheckers in complexity. Our experience with the Typed Racket base environment---which accounts for 31% of the code in the Typed Racket implementation---teaches us that writing type environments can be just as error-prone as writing typecheckers. We report on our experience over the past two years of using random testing to increase our confidence in the correctness of the Typed Racket base environment.","PeriodicalId":20504,"journal":{"name":"Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGPLAN international conference on Functional programming","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Experience report: applying random testing to a base type environment\",\"authors\":\"Vincent St-Amour, N. Toronto\",\"doi\":\"10.1145/2500365.2500616\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"As programmers, programming in typed languages increases our confidence in the correctness of our programs. As type system designers, soundness proofs increase our confidence in the correctness of our type systems. There is more to typed languages than their typing rules, however. To be usable, a typed language needs to provide a well-furnished standard library and to specify types for its exports. As software artifacts, these base type environments can rival typecheckers in complexity. Our experience with the Typed Racket base environment---which accounts for 31% of the code in the Typed Racket implementation---teaches us that writing type environments can be just as error-prone as writing typecheckers. We report on our experience over the past two years of using random testing to increase our confidence in the correctness of the Typed Racket base environment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":20504,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGPLAN international conference on Functional programming\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGPLAN international conference on Functional programming\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1145/2500365.2500616\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Proceedings of the 18th ACM SIGPLAN international conference on Functional programming","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2500365.2500616","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

作为程序员,使用类型语言编程可以增加我们对程序正确性的信心。作为类型系统设计者,可靠性证明增加了我们对类型系统正确性的信心。然而,类型语言不仅仅是它们的类型规则。为了可用,类型化语言需要提供完善的标准库,并为其导出指定类型。作为软件工件,这些基本类型环境在复杂性上可以与类型检查器相媲美。我们使用类型化球拍基础环境的经验——占类型化球拍实现中31%的代码——告诉我们,编写类型环境可能和编写类型检查器一样容易出错。我们报告我们在过去两年中使用随机测试的经验,以增加我们对Typed Racket基础环境正确性的信心。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Experience report: applying random testing to a base type environment
As programmers, programming in typed languages increases our confidence in the correctness of our programs. As type system designers, soundness proofs increase our confidence in the correctness of our type systems. There is more to typed languages than their typing rules, however. To be usable, a typed language needs to provide a well-furnished standard library and to specify types for its exports. As software artifacts, these base type environments can rival typecheckers in complexity. Our experience with the Typed Racket base environment---which accounts for 31% of the code in the Typed Racket implementation---teaches us that writing type environments can be just as error-prone as writing typecheckers. We report on our experience over the past two years of using random testing to increase our confidence in the correctness of the Typed Racket base environment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信