4 ms·
By "this" I meant what I linked, not "what you just said". I realize in retrospect that I was unclear. I'm not sure if their approach would imply satisfying the
by insanitybit 4y ago
By "this" I meant what I linked, not "what you just said". I realize in retrospect that I was unclear. I'm not sure if their approach would imply satisfying the (true, true)/ (false, false) case given that they are separate branches.
- taeric 4y agoRight, but I think that is what the original poster meant. There is a "path" through my example that hits both "doA()" and "doB()." And having 100% branch coverage doesn't necessarily get you there. Even under the stricter rule that they are using.
- insanitybit 4y agoYep, we're on the same page.
- taeric 4y agoComing back to this, I understand your previous post about "this" now. :D Apologies on misunderstanding that the first time around!