<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/styles/xslt/rss.xslt"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:trackback="http://madskills.com/public/xml/rss/module/trackback/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd" xmlns:c9="http://channel9.msdn.com">
<channel>
	<title>Comment Feed for Channel 9 - Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
	<atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET/RSS"></atom:link>
	
	<description>Pex&amp;nbsp;is a tool being developed by Microsoft Research which has the potential to dramatically improve the quality of software testing while requiring minimal, if any,&amp;nbsp;effort on the
 part of the developer. Pex can automatically generate a set of inputs for a paramaterized unit test which can effectively excercise most, if not all, possible code paths.

I visited&amp;nbsp;Nikolai Tillmann and&amp;nbsp;Peli de Halleux on the Pex team for a closer look at this cool technology.
</description>
	<link></link>
	<language>en</language>
	<pubDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 07:33:11 GMT</pubDate>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 07:33:11 GMT</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>Rev9</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[
<p>thats so awsome <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /></p>
<p>i like the floating &quot;we catch your bugs&quot; note in the background too&nbsp;<img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-5.gif' alt='Wink' /> </p>
<p>posted by aL_</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633507215200000000</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2008 22:38:40 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633507215200000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>aL_</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[This is the coolest thing I've seen in a long time.<br>
<br>
For those interested here are the blogs from Nikolai and Peli:<br>
<a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/nikolait">http&#58;&#47;&#47;blogs.msdn.com&#47;nikolait</a><br>
<a href="http://blog.dotnetwiki.org/default.aspx">http&#58;&#47;&#47;blog.dotnetwiki.org&#47;default.aspx</a><br>
<br>
I can't wait for this to hit 1.0!<br>
<p>posted by Stebet</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633507685820000000</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:43:02 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633507685820000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>Stebet</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[
<p>Nikolai and Peli,<br>
<br>
Very interesting technology - looking forward to v1.0 and a 64-bit version. Speaking of 64-bit, when will you release a beta that supports that version of the framework?</p>
<p>posted by Borum.NET</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633508003410000000</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 20:32:21 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633508003410000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>Borum.NET</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[As far as I am aware, 64bit version isn't planned any time soon.&nbsp;My suggestion - use a 32bit&nbsp;virtual machine.<p>posted by ben2004uk</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633508094220000000</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Jul 2008 23:03:42 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633508094220000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>ben2004uk</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Been using pex a little (not had time to really get into it yet), but its really impressive.. great work on this guys!<p>posted by stevo_</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633508780400000000</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 18:07:20 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633508780400000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>stevo_</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Too bad about the 64-bit version. We're more and more developers running in 64-bit environments (even in development), so it would really really nice to have access to the entire suite of tools. Running in a virtual environment when doing unit testing
 is probably one possible workaround, but I would definitely welcome 64-bit support.<br>
<br>
I've subscribed to the PEX list but haven't seen any trafic yet.<br>
<br>
Automated unittesting is worth dying for if done right. Can't really think of any code that wouldn't benefit (I suspect they even used Pex to test Pex <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' />).<p>posted by Borum.NET</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633508876960000000</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 05 Jul 2008 20:48:16 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633508876960000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>Borum.NET</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[
<p>Good news: we are working on a WOW64 version of Pex&nbsp; (support for exploring 32-bit .net processes on 64-bit).</p>
<p>posted by peli</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633509220960000000</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Jul 2008 06:21:36 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633509220960000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>peli</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[ive been playing around a lille with pex now and i just have to say.. WOW :O<br>
its GREAT! it sounded cool in the interview and all but in reality its even more awsome!<br>
if you havent already, you Have to check this out! the vs integration is sweeet <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><br>
the last time i had this kind of experience was when i tried out wpf! <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /> unit testing is no longer a horrible bore but actually something interesting <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><br>
<br>
again, great work pex team! cant wait for the next release <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><br>
<br>
i do have a qustion though <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /> is there a way to get pex to try a generic method with a bunch of diffrent types? i guess i could use like a list of instances of the various types and get pex to use diffrent lists or diffrent indexes in the list (like with a
 static list and a int argument to the parameterized method)<br>
<br>
but im sure there is a smarter way <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><p>posted by aL_</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633509635910000000</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Jul 2008 17:53:11 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633509635910000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>aL_</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[
<p>Pex actually supports generic unit tests: add generic arguments to the unit test and specify the instanciation types using 'PexUseGenericArgumentsAttribute':</p>
<p>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [PexMethod]<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; [PexUseGenericArguments(typeof(int))]<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; public void AddItem(List&lt;T&gt; target, T item) {<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; ...<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; }<br>
</p>
<p>posted by peli</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633509746820000000</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Jul 2008 20:58:02 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633509746820000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>peli</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[
<p>aaah, awsome <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /> and i see it also takes multiple parameters too, sweet <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><br>
<br>
is there also a way to have a staging method be called before each test or at the start of each test run?<br>
by stageing method i mean&nbsp;a&nbsp;static method that sets up the environment in diffrent ways. i guess i could call it from within the parameterized test but maybe the pex team thought of something more clever here as well <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><br>
&nbsp;<br>
im sorry if thats in the docs somewhere or in the ms test api thats built into vs, im sort of a noob with this kind of testing... <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /> im used to writing eeeverything myself.. <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-7.gif' alt='Perplexed' /> that is also why pex makes me ever so happy <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-2.gif' alt='Big Smile' /><br>
<br>
maybe that isnt even a smaart thing to do.. <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /> i guess im sort of trying to do some mini system tests in my unit tests..<img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /> but i figure, whats&nbsp;a unit anyway.. a part of a system could be a unit even if its actually a system in it self right? <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><br>
<br>
oh i got another question too<br>
is there a way to have the parameterized test pick some of the parameters from somewhere (like a collection) and try and figure the other ones out? like if i have a method that takes some arguments and a file path to like a config file and i want it to try
 out a few diffrent config files with various permutations of the other arguments to the method<br>
so basically what i waant to do is databind to some of the arguments but have pex figure out the others <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' />
</p>
<p>posted by aL_</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633509831750000000</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 Jul 2008 23:19:35 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633509831750000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>aL_</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[
<p>staging method: if the code that is being run in the method is relevant, you really want&nbsp; to call it from the parameterized test. Otherwise, you can use [TestInitialize], [TestCleanup] methods, they are supported by Pex.</p>
<p>Since you are mentioning the environment, be aware that Pex does not understand the environment (i.e. Pex cannot build constraint over the state of the file system, network, current time, etc...).</p>
<p>Partial databinding: interresting idea but it's not supported as is right now. Currently, create multiple copies of the test or use the 'Abstract Test Pattern'.</p>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
<p>posted by peli</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633510053890000000</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 05:29:49 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633510053890000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>peli</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[
<p>--<br>
staging method: if the code that is being run in the method is relevant, you really want&nbsp; to call it from the parameterized test. Otherwise, you can use [TestInitialize], [TestCleanup] methods, they are supported by Pex.<br>
--<br>
<br>
alright i'll try that <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' />&nbsp;<br>
<br>
--<br>
Since you are mentioning the environment, be aware that Pex does not understand the environment (i.e. Pex cannot build constraint over the state of the file system, network, current time, etc...).<br>
--<br>
no i understand that <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /> that would be kind of spooky.. <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-7.gif' alt='Perplexed' /> and awsome <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-4.gif' alt='Tongue Out' /> that is why it would be cool if one could supply a list of alternatives somehow <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><br>
<br>
--<br>
Partial databinding: interresting idea but it's not supported as is right now. Currently, create multiple copies of the test or use the 'Abstract Test Pattern'.<br>
--<br>
alright <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /> one could work around it by adding an int to te parameterized test, assume its within the range of a collection defined somewhere and use the int to look up the alternatives from that collection, but i guess pex wouldnt know that its supposed to
 use all the ints in the range..&nbsp; you could also use if statements though, then pex would try to satisfy them <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /> but if there are alot of alternatives that might be cumbersome..<br>
perhaps a dictionary with an enumeration as a key? im just letting my mind wander.. <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-2.gif' alt='Big Smile' /><br>
<br>
<br>
again, great work pex team <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /></p>
<p>posted by aL_</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633510131270000000</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 07:38:47 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633510131270000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>aL_</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[If you're willing to dig deeper, Pex is extensible. You could implement your own [PexMethod] variation that performs the custom databinding. Unfortunately, there's no sample on this for now <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><p>posted by peli</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633510384660000000</link>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:41:06 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633510384660000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>peli</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[had some more fun with pex <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><br>
<br>
is there a way to get a certin pexmethod to use one factory and another (or all others) to use some otherway of exploring classes?<br>
<br>
or perhaps that factory souhld be a&nbsp;pex factory but just a regular static&nbsp;method that is called from the parameterized test?<br>
<br>
also, if you want your custom classes to appear in the table of results and arguemnts in visual studio, should you use&nbsp;PexValue.AddForValidation? (for arguments that are custom classes as well?) or is there some other way to do that?
<br>
<p>posted by aL_</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633513697760000000</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 10:42:56 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633513697760000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>aL_</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[&gt; is there a way to get a certin pexmethod to use one factory and another (or all others) to use some otherway of exploring classes?<br>
<br>
There is no automated way and only 1 factory per type is supported.<br>
<br>
&gt;&nbsp;or perhaps that factory souhld be a&nbsp;pex factory but just a regular static&nbsp;method that is called from the parameterized test?<br>
Exactly.<br>
<br>
&gt;&nbsp;also, if you want your custom classes to appear in the table of results and arguemnts in visual studio, should you use&nbsp;PexValue.AddForValidation?<br>
<br>
You can simply use PexValue.Add:<br>
<br>
&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; PexValue.Add(&quot;name&quot;, myobject.ToString());<br>
<br>
By default, Pex does not call the ToString() method of user defined types, because it might stack overflow... and kill the process. Moreover, it might have sideeffect that would change the test behavior.<br>
<br>
PexValue.AddForValidation works similarly (it adds the value in the parameter table) but it also tells Pex to encode the observed value in the generated test for regression testing.<br>
<p>posted by peli</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633513813180000000</link>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2008 13:55:18 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633513813180000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>peli</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[
<p>great stuff!<br>
thanks <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /></p>
<p>posted by aL_</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633514744790000000</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jul 2008 15:47:59 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633514744790000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>aL_</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[I've been playing with it for a while. Even though I know I shouldn't use&nbsp;it with&nbsp;production&nbsp;code (this is a research project), but&nbsp;I had to run it against real, production code to see some real results. Seems like me and my fellow team members forgot
 to write some very important tests <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><br>
<br>
I hope to find this in a future release of Visual Studio.<p>posted by JorisW</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633517592200000000</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jul 2008 22:53:40 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633517592200000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>JorisW</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[I really like the concept. However I have some doubts ... <br>
<br>
1. How would Pex fare if the system is a state machine ? How would it limit the number of constraints it would need to test out. ?<br>
2. What about unsafe blocks in code ? <br>
3. Also when you say bugs these are purely functional right ..<br>
<br>
Also is there any place I can have a look at a sample test report .<br>
I am really looking forward to a fully functional release of Pex. <br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Anand<p>posted by Anand Manikiam</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633520672220000000</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 12:27:02 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633520672220000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>Anand Manikiam</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[
<p>1. Not sure what you mean there. Pex does not generate API sequence calls currently if that's what you mean.<br>
2. Pex can reason about unverifiable IL, i.e. unsafe C# for example. However, Pex cannot monitor native code (i.e. C&#43;&#43; code). In that case, one needs to provide a 'managed' implementation.<br>
3. Not sure what you mean there.<br>
4. You can download the academic release of Pex. Nikolai has published a blog post where Pex is applied to the ResourceReader (<a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/nikolait/archive/2008/06/04/fun-with-the-resourcereader.aspx">http://blogs.msdn.com/nikolait/archive/2008/06/04/fun-with-the-resourcereader.aspx</a>).
 The resource reacher touches a lot of classes in the BCL, including Encoding classes which are mostly unsafe.<br>
</p>
<p>posted by peli</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633520763420000000</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 19 Jul 2008 14:59:02 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633520763420000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>peli</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Why can't constraints be constructs that can be applied on the class and methods and automatically enforced on the caller by the framework? That is, one&nbsp;should be able to decorate a method with:<br>
<br>
[Pre-Constraint: i&gt;=1, i&lt;=int.MaxValue, c!=null]<br>
[Post-Constraint: i==i, c==c]<br>
<br>
//Pre-constraint indicates value of i accepted from caller must be greater or equal to 1; and that c cannot be null.<br>
//Post-Constraint imply that on method exit the constraints should also be respected otherwise the method cannot successfully complete - constraint exception condition<br>
<br>
The above constraint would be enforced on calling code at design or compile&nbsp;time (if a known value or a variable whose value is known is being passed). The constraint on class instances being used in a method should then&nbsp;be passed up the chain to all callers.
 This would at least reduce a lot of run-time time issues since the constraints are enforced at design or compile time.<br>
<br>
In fact the i&lt;=int.MaxValue constraint would be superfluous if int already defines constraint on acceptable values of between MinValue and MaxValue.<br>
<br>
---<br>
Taiwo<p>posted by taiwo</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633605590070000000</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 25 Oct 2008 19:16:47 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633605590070000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>taiwo</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[This looks really interesting, but obviously can only work to a point due to undecidability constraints.&nbsp; So how sophisticated does it get?&nbsp; If I have in my code:<br>
<br>
if (SeventhOrderPolynomial(x) &lt; 0)...<br>
<br>
will Pex actually try to solve the polynomial and put in values of x where it is larger than zero and others where it is smaller?&nbsp; Does it give up at a certain order?&nbsp; Linear?&nbsp; Diophontine equations?&nbsp; Does it use some sort of Monte Carlo algorithm to guess
 at values which may or may produce different branches in the code?<br>
<br>
I'm impressed regardless.&nbsp; Very nice work.<p>posted by darrellp</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633613763360000000</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 06:18:56 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633613763360000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>darrellp</dc:creator>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Re: Pex - Automated Exploratory Testing for .NET </title>
		<description>
			<![CDATA[Hey you're asking too much! Pex relies on Z3 (<a href="http://research.microsoft.com/projects/z3/">http://research.microsoft.com/projects/z3/</a>) an SMT solver developed in our group as well to 'solve' those problems. Z3 has limited support for non-linear
 arithmetic and generally does not implement optimization techniques (no simplex, no montecarlo, no simulated annealing or other). Z3 is really geared towards problems that are encountered in most problem... which are not usually 7th order equations <img src='http://ecn.channel9.msdn.com/o9/content/images/emoticons/emotion-1.gif' alt='Smiley' /><br>
<br>
Note that you can download Z3 yourself, and ask it questions.<p>posted by peli</p>]]>
		</description>
		<link>http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633614089940000000</link>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:23:14 GMT</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="true">http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/briankel/Pex-Automated-Exploratory-Testing-for-NET#c633614089940000000</guid>
		<dc:creator>peli</dc:creator>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>