verification
Part of the wro.cpp verification series — 5 of 5 posts published so far.
A real GoogleTest suite runs in your browser
GoogleTest is a Compiler Explorer library, so a real test binary builds and runs in the browser and prints the familiar RUN/OK report. That makes a shareable link the cheapest possible way to settle an argument about behavior. Episode 1 of the verification series, on assembling a C++ setup that catches bugs before your users do.
The same assertion, as a unit test and as a fuzzer
Google FuzzTest lets one assertion serve as both a bounded property test that runs with your normal suite and a coverage-guided fuzzer you invoke on demand. Written against a deliberately buggy encoder, it found the counterexample without being asked to fuzz at all, and printed a regression test to paste back.
RealtimeSanitizer checks the promise that a function never blocks
Mark a function [[clang::nonblocking]] and RealtimeSanitizer verifies at runtime that nothing inside it allocates, locks, or makes a syscall. It is the sanitizer for audio callbacks, control loops, and any deadline-bound code where a hidden malloc is a dropped frame. Episode 3 of the verification series.
You can see the dependency chain without running anything
Before reaching for a profiler, read what the compiler already produced. Two loops that add the same floats compile to eight adds into one register versus four independent accumulators, and llvm-mca will predict the throughput difference from that assembly without executing a single instruction. Episode 4 of the verification series.
The hottest line is often not the one worth optimizing
A sampling profiler tells you where time is spent, which is not the same as where speeding things up would help. Causal profiling answers the second question directly, and it routinely disagrees with the first. A tour of the profilers worth knowing in 2026: Coz, Tracy, poop, samply, and plain perf.