3 ms·
This seems right, Never have I not found bugs while chasing code coverage. When I've pushed for higher code coverage, I usually find some bugs. General Code R
by lumost 4y ago
This seems right, Never have I not found bugs while chasing code coverage. When I've pushed for higher code coverage, I usually find some bugs. General Code Review becomes easier when you can see that the person tested all of the edge cases and has a clean 100% coverage on the CR. When the code gets deployed I can generally trust that it's going to work, or get rolled back in a staging environment.
It's certainly possible to make high quality code without tests (see Linux), but simply taking the time and writing tests seems to accelerate development.
- bluefirebrand 4y agoThis is fine if people are diligent about writing good tests. If you enforce coverage on a busy team with less experienced or less diligent engineers, you're going to get a lot of "tests" that just pass for coverage purposes and gives false confidence in your code and doesn't gain you anything.
- lumost 4y agoFair, it's easy to get execution without validation, but ultimately this is where code review matters. The (huge) company that I work at now is the only one that's ever strongly encouraged test coverage, with a general expectation of 85% coverage and 95%+ encouraged. It's also the only company that I've worked at where you can commit code and get up from your desk.