<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>papermachete</author><text>If I am going to plaster extra asserts and predicates in my code, why not just use a logic programming language or something like SPARK&amp;#x2F;TLA+ anyway? Not looking for an argument, just asking a question.&lt;p&gt;I&amp;#x27;ve tried replacing asserts with Mercury code in my C++ pet projects. Felt much easier to insert my thots into the source.&lt;p&gt;By the way, what do you guys think of predicate-based formal verification? I think overall, C++ Concepts are checked for object class compatibility via a logic engine, since Concepts are predicates.</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Write Fuzzable Code</title><url>https://blog.regehr.org/archives/1687</url></story>
<instructions>Your goal is to analyze the following comment and estimate how highly it will be upvoted by the Hacker News community.</instructions><comment><author>sriram_sun</author><text>What&amp;#x27;s a good tutorial for fuzzing? I work with many code bases in my consulting, none of which have come close to being &amp;quot;fuzzed&amp;quot;. I&amp;#x27;ve googled around and the learning curve is steeper than expected. I am approaching it like learning a new unit-test framework. Perhaps that&amp;#x27;s wrong? Is it like integrating a code coverage tool or memory analysis like valgrind? This article seems like a bunch of high-level entreaties to go fuzz etc. maybe I missed something.</text><parent_chain></parent_chain></comment><story><title>Write Fuzzable Code</title><url>https://blog.regehr.org/archives/1687</url></story>