2 ms·

I mean, this is the kind of thing I agree with, and would even say I'd trust a project with 90% coverage but no surviving test mutants vs. 100% and lots of muta

I mean, this is the kind of thing I agree with, and would even say I'd trust a project with 90% coverage but no surviving test mutants vs. 100% and lots of mutants. But in reality I'm usually looking at piles of like... 60-70%ish? Thousands of mutants. Maybe a round-trip fuzz or property test if I'm lucky. So I keep aiming for 100% and hoping anyone else follows...

pawelduda 3y ago
These are also more expensive kinds of tests to setup and run so it's often not feasible, maybe in extreme cases. In a few Rails codebases I tried to mutation test something critical only to see that getting it to work would take more time than worth the effort