> #1 is absolutely important. You can't just take valuable time and money from people to do "testing" that, in my opinion, wouldn't tell you anything anyway. I

> #1 is absolutely important. You can't just take valuable time and money from people to do "testing" that, in my opinion, wouldn't tell you anything anyway. If you used this argument against something like TDD (in which a 15% extra upfront cost is more than paid for by a 60-90% reduction in produced bugs, according to the Nagappan paper), it would fall flat. If you do it enough times you will get a picture of precision and recall, which IMHO would be an important determinant of effectiveness. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_and_recall https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precision_and_recall