You can at least try to prove the code works, and you can get a lot further than people seem to bother. Hell: even just using a language with types--which many

You can at least try to prove the code works, and you can get a lot further than people seem to bother. Hell: even just using a language with types--which many people don't do--is a form of invariant that proves away a lot of potential bugs you would otherwise have to test. And like, we absolutely have proof assistants and model checkers and more advanced languages with dependent types (even C++ can do a lot more than many languages due to how it can template over values, which includes stuff like the sizes of buffers on which it can do math at compile time, but we should be spending more time coding in the like of Coq/Idris/Lean)... let's not normalize a world in which people entirely give up on formal correctness. The problem with tests is that people use them as a crutch to not have to even just prove to themselves in their head -- much less to someone else or in a way that can be checked by a machine -- why their code does or doesn't work... they just throw together a ton of tests and if they hammer the code and when the tests stop failing they proudly announce "I guess it works now" and move on. My challenge: try to code for a while with the mentality that every every time you stop typing to test it or run and it doesn't work (including "my tests failed"), that is a serious problem that should be avoided. Instead, try your best to make it so the first time you get around to testing your code it works because you are that confident in how it works.