Bug report
Right now there are several points I would like to see improved in this file:
- We need to clarify that
$test_name should be replaced with an actual test name:
|
int $test_name (const char* data, size_t size) { |
|
... |
|
return 0; |
|
} |
_Py_FUZZ_YES is not actually used in our code, docs:
|
#if _Py_FUZZ_YES(fuzz_builtin_float) |
code:
|
#if !defined(_Py_FUZZ_ONE) || defined(_Py_FUZZ_fuzz_elementtree_parsewhole) |
- Why is
fuzz_builtin_float is used in this example? https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/82235449b85165add62c1b200299456a50a1d097/Modules/_xxtestfuzz/README.rst#L34C9-L34C41 It is better to use $test_name. Or even better $fuzz_test_name to have a common prefix.
Linked PRs
Bug report
Right now there are several points I would like to see improved in this file:
$test_nameshould be replaced with an actual test name:cpython/Modules/_xxtestfuzz/README.rst
Lines 26 to 29 in 8223544
_Py_FUZZ_YESis not actually used in our code, docs:cpython/Modules/_xxtestfuzz/README.rst
Line 34 in 8223544
cpython/Modules/_xxtestfuzz/fuzzer.c
Line 699 in 7fb32e0
fuzz_builtin_floatis used in this example? https://github.com/python/cpython/blob/82235449b85165add62c1b200299456a50a1d097/Modules/_xxtestfuzz/README.rst#L34C9-L34C41 It is better to use$test_name. Or even better$fuzz_test_nameto have a common prefix.Linked PRs
_xxtestfuzz/README.rst#121024_xxtestfuzz/README.rst(GH-121024) #124140_xxtestfuzz/README.rst(GH-121024) #124141