Abstract
It is a very undesirable situation that today’s software often contains errors. One motivation for using a functional programming language is that it is more difficult (or even impossible) to make low-level mistakes, and it is easier to reason about programs. But even the most advanced functional programmers are not infallible; they misunderstand the properties of their own programs, or those of others, and so commit errors.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Chitil, O., Runciman, C., Wallace, M.: Freja, Hat and Hood - a comparative evaluation of three systems for tracing and debugging lazy functional programs. In: Mohnen, M., Koopman, P. (eds.) IFL 2000. LNCS, vol. 2011, pp. 176–193. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)
Chitil, O., Runciman, C., Wallace, M.: Transforming Haskell for tracing. In: Peña, R., Arts, T. (eds.) IFL 2002. LNCS, vol. 2670. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)
Claessen, K., Hughes, J.: QuickCheck: a lightweight tool for random testing of Haskell programs. In: International Conference on Functional Programming, pp. 268–279. ACM, New York (2000)
Claessen, K., Hughes, J.: Testing monadic code with QuickCheck. In: Haskell Workshop. ACM, New York (2002)
Duran, J., Ntafos, S.: An evaluation of random testing. Transactions on Software Engineering 10(4), 438–444 (1984)
Gill, A.: Debugging Haskell by observing intermediate datastructures. Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, vol. 41(1) (2001); Proc. 2000 ACM SIGPLAN Haskell Workshop
Hamlet, D.: Random testing. In: Marciniak, J. (ed.) Encyclopedia of Software Engineering, pp. 970–978. Wiley, Chichester (1994)
Hamlet, R., Taylor, R.: Partition testing does not inspire confidence. Transactions on Software Engineering 16(12), 1402–1411 (1990)
Herington, D.: HUnit 1.0 user’s guide (2002), http://hunit.sourceforge.net/HUnit-1.0/Guide.html
Moss, G.E.: Benchmarking purely functional data structures. PhD thesis, Dept. of Computer Science, University of York, UK (2000)
Moss, G.E., Runciman, C.: Inductive benchmarking for purely functional data structures. Journal of Functional Programming 11(5), 525–556 (2001)
Nilsson, H.: Declarative Debugging for Lazy Functional Languages. PhD thesis, Linköping University, Sweden (1998)
Sparud, J., Runciman, C.: Complete and partial redex trails of functional computations. In: Clack, C., Hammond, K., Davie, T. (eds.) IFL 1997. LNCS, vol. 1467, pp. 160–177. Springer, Heidelberg (1998)
Sparud, J., Runciman, C.: Tracing lazy functional computations using redex trails. In: Hartel, P.H., Kuchen, H. (eds.) PLILP 1997. LNCS, vol. 1292, pp. 291–308. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)
Wallace, M., Chitil, O., Brehm, T., Runciman, C.: Multipleview tracing for Haskell: a new Hat. In: Haskell Workshop. ACM, New York (September 2001)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Claessen, K., Runciman, C., Chitil, O., Hughes, J., Wallace, M. (2003). Testing and Tracing Lazy Functional Programs Using QuickCheck and Hat. In: Jeuring, J., Jones, S.L.P. (eds) Advanced Functional Programming. AFP 2002. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2638. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-44833-4_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-44833-4_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-540-40132-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44833-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive