> 100% doesn't mean you have good tests That's true, but if you are really doing TDD the way some understand it (small methods, readily testable), then 100% te

> 100% doesn't mean you have good tests That's true, but if you are really doing TDD the way some understand it (small methods, readily testable), then 100% test complete TDD means you didn't write any code you didn't test intentionally. By 100% coverage, I don't mean a code metric result from a tool, I mean that you followed TDD to a T and didn't write code that you didn't test carefully and intentionally. The loose form of TDD you mention is not TDD by others' standards. Strict TDD never says, "those tests you wrote to test the app in the browser- those are enough; you don't need to unit test that, because you're testing all the important and edge cases we care about, even without unit tests." Yet, that may result in fewer, less brittle tests that can survive an upgrade or other massive changes in the implementation.