{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Quick700/Quick700/issues/13","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Quick700/Quick700","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Quick700/Quick700/issues/13/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Quick700/Quick700/issues/13/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Quick700/Quick700/issues/13/events","html_url":"https://github.com/Quick700/Quick700/issues/13","id":378981133,"node_id":"MDU6SXNzdWUzNzg5ODExMzM=","number":13,"title":"Can we measure execution path coverage?","user":{"login":"Chobbes","id":5215874,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjUyMTU4NzQ=","avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/5215874?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes","html_url":"https://github.com/Chobbes","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"id":1121287401,"node_id":"MDU6TGFiZWwxMTIxMjg3NDAx","url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Quick700/Quick700/labels/ideas","name":"ideas","color":"6bf974","default":false}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"assignees":[],"milestone":null,"comments":10,"created_at":"2018-11-09T01:00:40Z","updated_at":"2018-11-27T01:30:02Z","closed_at":null,"author_association":"CONTRIBUTOR","body":"Is there a tool to measure coverage in an executing program, kind of like AFL does, but without the actual fuzzing?\r\n\r\nThis might be a nice way to measure the performance of FuzzChick vs. QuickChick if we can get the same coverage statistics for both."},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Quick700/Quick700/issues/comments/441863567","html_url":"https://github.com/Quick700/Quick700/issues/13#issuecomment-441863567","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/Quick700/Quick700/issues/13","id":441863567,"node_id":"MDEyOklzc3VlQ29tbWVudDQ0MTg2MzU2Nw==","user":{"login":"Chobbes","id":5215874,"node_id":"MDQ6VXNlcjUyMTU4NzQ=","avatar_url":"https://avatars0.githubusercontent.com/u/5215874?v=4","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes","html_url":"https://github.com/Chobbes","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/Chobbes/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2018-11-27T01:30:02Z","updated_at":"2018-11-27T01:30:02Z","author_association":"CONTRIBUTOR","body":"Also, I believe I found an issue in bisect_ppx which makes it kind of a pain to get it to work with QuickChick:\r\n\r\nhttps://github.com/aantron/bisect_ppx/issues/180"}}
{"actor":{"display_login":"Chobbes"}}